This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project to make the world's books discoverable online. It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the publisher to a library and finally to you. Usage guidelines Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. We also ask that you: + Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for personal, non-commercial purposes. + Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. + Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. + Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe. About Google Book Search Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web at |http : //books . google . com/ SOC. D 926 m TOZZER LIBRARY .. .... Gift^of Alfred Marston Tozzer 1877 - 1954 PEABODY MUSEUM OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND ETHNOLOGY HARVARD UNIVERSITY }^ FROM THE I Jn:T/\R^ qF > •^T^^ycLARKE Co. ^^^u>><>gJD"^^ THE CONTEMPORARY SCIENCE SERIES, Edited by HAVELOCK ELLIS. MORALS: A TREATISE ON THE PSYCHO-SOCIOLOGICAL BASES OF ETHICS. MORALS: A TREATISE ON THE PSYCHO-SOCIOLOGICAL BASES OF ETHICS. BY PROFESSOR G. L. DUPRAT. TRANSLATED BY W. J. GREENSTREET, M.A., F.R.A.S. THE WALTER SCOTT PUBLISHING CO., LTD., PATERNOSTER SQUARE, LONDON, E.G. CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, 153-157 FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK. 1903- ^0 V- RECEIVED 5BP 1 8 1978 PREFACE. The field of psychological research has widened by the triple alliance of psychology, physiology, and sociology — an alliance at once of the most intimate and fundamental nature, and productive of far- reaching results. It need, therefore, occasion no surprise that among the volumes of a scientific series is to be found a treatise dealing with ethical questions. No doubt it is true that ethics and metaphysics have up to the present been closely interwoven. Under the guise of ethical theory, philosophical speculations of the most audacious type are presented to the student. But recent works on ethics have not been numerous, and betray signs of lassitude in those metaphysicians who paraphrase in general terms the works of Kant, and seem more anxious to soar into the realms of lofty thought than to lay the foundations of work that will be both positive and lasting. It would seem that the time has come for a system of ethics less ambitious in its aims, more restricted in its scope, and based on a more rigorous method of treatment. To build and complete the temple of VI PREFACE. positive morality is beyond our power, but we are able, at any rate, to claim for the psychologist and the sociologist the exclusive right of supplying the moralist with the material for the foundations of his ethical doctrine. In the near future it will, no doubt, be a matter of surprise that men were so pretentious as to teach morals, and to direct the most complex of all activities, without having made, as a preliminary, a sufficiently exhaustive study of man and of society. We shall be amazed at the subjectivity of moral conceptions, even while we remember that they were the work of the greatest minds of every age ; at assertions based on incomplete and even in- accurate notions of individual and social life; at precepts of value to the individual alone, enunciated by him for the purpose of justifying his manner of life, systematised " after the event," when prejudices and preconceived ideas have had their natural effect on a mind which then offers itself, more or less unconsciously, as a model to its contemporaries and their descendants ! Plato, with his aristocratic and Athenian tastes — Aristotle, saturated with intellectualism — Descartes, oscillating between science and religion — Spinoza, a fatalist and mystic, — each in turn has described the moral ideal according to his own temperament and personal tendencies, and this they have done in almost complete self-absorption, as if assured that all other mortals were fashioned like unto them, PREFACE. Vll and that they themselves were the noblest types of humanity. For centuries it has seemed that morals could alone be taught by the " Beyond-man," chosen of God to guide his fellows, a being instantaneously inspired, laying down precepts of wisdom, the value of which was entirely dependent on their beauty and elevation of thought. It necessarily followed that the foundations on which these precepts were based could not be brought to the touchstone of criticism — they were the inspirations of genius, and sprang from the depths of the unconscious; like the con- ceptions of the artist, they could attract and seduce by appealing to the heart rather than to the reason. It was not long, however, before those psycho- logists who had appealed to mental disorders for light on the conditions of normal life, rounded off their purely scientific researches by practical appli- cations in the domains of both politics and morals. Italian anthropology has linked by the closest ties the theory of law, of sanction, and of crime to psychology and psychiatry; sociology has taken its place among the positive sciences, and its relation to ethics is beyond dispute. But we can only link together psychology and sociology by admitting the mixed, the psycho- sociological,^ character of most of the sentiments ' Cf. my Rapports de la Psychologic et de la Sociologie (Imprimerie Nationale, 1899) and Science Sociale et Dkmocratie (Giard et Briere, 1900). Vlll PREFACE. and ideas that the moralist has to take into consideration. It is no longer necessary to examine these senti- ments and ideas from the point of view of this or that moral theory. And as, on the one hand, their psycho-sociological nature makes them functions of social life and of the collective future; and as, on the other hand, the concrete being is the being which lives in society, and with it ethics is neces- sarily concerned, it follows that the sociologist must share his task with the psychologist. Whoever, therefore, wishes to lay down rules for the guidance of the conduct of his fellow-creatures must be a savant before he is a moralist; he must at least be in a position to avail himself of the scientific data which are placed at his service by individual and social psychology. He must realise the inevitable transformation of the moralist from the "sage" or the "seer" to the man of science. The doctor- philosopher of to-day, who, following men like Charcot, Ribot, and Janet, has introduced into psychology an entirely new spirit, now applies to the moral life the really scientific knowledge he has acquired in his clinical work, in the laboratory, in the hospital, and in the asylum; he thus welds together two links in a chain — and even now the necessity is not sufficiently realised— the study of nervous or mental diseases and the struggle against social diseases — i.e., against immorality. The reader cannot expect that in a volume such PREFACE. IX as this human conduct can be treated other than as a whole. To go into detail, to justify every assertion, to deduce every consequence, would necessitate volumes of considerable size. But, quite apart from that, no single individual could be found sufficiently competent to undertake the task. This volume, therefore, contains but a general view of the foundations of ethics, and of some of the directing ideas of " really human ** conduct. On many points, no doubt, knowledge is still lacking; on many others the science of to-morrow will throw doubt on the assertions which are supported by the science of to-day. No one in these matters can boast with respect to any formula for which he is responsible — ne varietur. Let each reader amend what he reads to the best of his ability. A moral theory is proposed and not imposed; but when it is propounded in the name of science, there can be produced in its defence stronger scientific evidence than is available for the purpose of those who attack, or amend, or complete it. G. L. DUPRAT. CONTENTS. :^ART I. THE METHOD. FACE I. Ethics, Metaphysics, and Religion ... 2 I. The Moral Crisis — 2. Morals in the Ancient World — 3. Moral Philosophy — 4. Powerlessness of Philo- sophy — 5. Powerlessness of Religion — 6. Conditions of Morality. II. Scientific Morality 12 7. Independent Ethics — 8. The Science of Ethics — 9. Kantian Ethics and its Postulates— 10. Science and Ethics— II. The Real and the Ideal— -12. The Tech- nical Character of Morality — 13. Spiritualism, Idealism, and Naturalism — 14. Morals as a Technical Process. III. Individual and Social Ethics 26 15. The Arts and Ethics— 16. Social Ethics— 17. The Moral Consciousness — 18. The Data of Reason — 19. Rational Conduct — 20. Duty and Moral Worth — 21. Individual Dignity. IV. The Different Modes of Ethical Re- search 40 22. The Kantian Method — 23. Plato and Aristotle— 24. Adam Smith — 25. Spencer — 26. Conclusion on Method. Xll CONTENTS. PART II. THE PSYCHOLOGICAL IDEAL. PAGE I. The Moral Will 52 27. Pure Practical Reason — 28. Moral Action, Voluntary Action— 29. Perception, Conception, and Imagination — 30. Attention and Association — 31. Perception and the Sensorial Type — 32. Self-per- ception — 33. Instability and Aboulia — 34. Deliberation — 35. The Conscious Processes— 36. Irreflection and Good Manners — 37.The Choice of the Best — 38. Priority of the Tendency over the Idea of the Good — 39. Moral Subjectivism — 40. Unification of Tendencies and Heredity — 41. The Reason -r- 42. The Union of Different Tendencies and of Reason. II. Liberty and Morality 80 43. Kant and Free-will — 44. The Origin of Character — 45. Science, Conscience, and Liberty — 46. Be,lief and Liberty — 47. The Person the Real Agent — 48. Conclusion. III. The Moral Tendencies ... ... ... 94 49. Different Tendencies, Different Doctrines — 50. Naturalism — 51. Hedonism — 52. Epicureanism — 53. Utilitarianism — 54. Interest and Desire — 55. Egoism — 56. The Collective Interest — 57. Intellectual Happi- ness — 58. Mysticism — 59. The Ethics of Spinoza — 60. The Stoic Morality— 61. The ^Esthetic Sentiment— 62. The Altruistic Tendencies — 63. Generosity — 64. Sociability — 65. Tendency to Social Organisation. IV. The Moral Individual 135 66. The Psychological Ideal and Moral Firmness— 67. Moderation— 68. Virtue and Truth— 69. The Cult of the Beautiful — 70. Joy — 71. Risk and Exercise. CONTENTS. XIU PAGE V. The Determinism of Immoral Actions ... 152 72. Crime — 73. Crime and the Criminal — 74. Classifi- cation and Descriptive Summary— 75. The Criminal by Accident — 76. Insane Criminals — 77. Immorality of the Imbecile — 78. Intelligent Degenerates — 79. The Unbalanced— 80. The Criminal by Passion— 81. The Obsessed — 82. Exaggeration of Good Sentiments — 83. Moral Vertigo — 84. The Criminal Type — 85. Immoral Effects of Solidarity — 86. Effects of Heredity, Alcoholism, and Social Disturbances in General. PART III. THE SOCIAL IDEAL. I. Social Evolution ,. ... 189 87. The Present State of Sociology— 88. Social Statics and Dynamics — 89. The Evolution of the Family — 90. The Matriarchate and the Primitive Condition of Woman — 91. The Primitive Condition of Children — 92. The **Patria Potestas" and the Dissolution of the Family — 93. The Future of the Family — 94. Animal Societies — 95. Political Life and the Struggle of Classes — 96. The Idea of Equality — 97. Governments — 98. Plutocracy— 99. Political Evolution and Law — icx>. The Law of Contract. 11. Social Evolution (continued) 215 loi. The Primitive Economic State — 102. Economic Evolution — 103. Division of Labour — 104. Association — 105. Slavery and Property — 106. Property — 107. Capital and Labour — 108. Collective Sentiments — 109. Differentiation of the Primitive Sentiments — no. The Evolution of Sociability — lit. The Religion of Humanity and of the Unknowable — \\Zs Sociological Anticipations, XIV CONTENTS. PAGE III. The Social Ideal ... ... 235 113. Individualism and Altruism — 114. The Over- Man— 115. Sacrifice of the Unfit — 116. The Gospel of Tolstoi — 117. Renunciation — 118. The Consequences of Non-resistance to Evil — 1 19. The Necessity of Con- flict— 120. Despotism— 121. The Meek— 122. The Aristocracy — 123. Importance of the Theory of Rights. IV. Rights 257 124. TheFoundationof Rights— 125. Natural Right — 126. Metaphysical Right and Dignity — 127. Rights of Social Function — 128. Justice and Devotion — 129. Justice and Charity — 130. The Right of Property — 131. The Share of the Community — 132. Property and Reform — 133. The Hereditary Transmission of Property. V. The State ... ... ... 274 134. The Role of the State— 135. Theories of Sover- eignty — 136. Summary of the Theories — 137. Relative Sovereignty and the Social Contract — 138. Duties of the State — 139. The State and Associations — 140. The State as Educator — 141. The State as Judge. VI. The Economic Organisation 292 142. Competition— 143. Subordination of the Economic Order to a Higher Order— 144. The R61e of the State — 145. The State Principle and the Corvee — 146. Taxation — 147. Solidarity in the Economic Order — 148. The Wages System— 149. Co-operation — 150. The Work of Women and Children— 151. Value of the Workman — 152. The Choice of a Profession — 153. The Rights and Duties of the Workman. VII. The Family, Friendship, and the Collec- tive Sentiments 314 154. The Rights of Woman~i55. Marriage— 156. The Co-Education and Equality of the Sexes— 157. CONTENTS. XV PAGE Divorce and Duties towards Children— 158. Duties of Children — 159. Friendship and Fraternity — 160. Man in Relation to Animals — 161. Genuine Human Senti- ments. PART IV. THE STRUGGLE AGAINST IMMORALITY. I. Social Responsibility. ... 334 162. Conditions of Responsibility. Intention — 163. Errors of Appreciation — 164. Insufficient Deliberation — 165. Irresponsibility — 166. Possible Modification of the Character — 167. Imputability — 168. Social Action. 11. Sanction and Moral Education 352 169. R81e and Nature of Sanction — 170. Happiness the Natural Consequence of Moral Action — 171. Merit — 172. The Immorality of Punishment — 173. Utilitarian Role of Punishment — 174. Moral Sugges- tion. Bibliography ... 371 Index 375 MORALS: THEIR PSYCHO-SOCIOLOGICAL BASES. PART I. THE METHOD. I. Ethics, Metaphysics, and Religion. I. The Moral Crisis — 2. Morals in the Ancient World — 3. Moral Philosophy — 4. Powerlessness of Philosophy — 5. Powerlessness of Religion — 6. Conditions of ^ Morality, II. Scientific Morality. 7. Independent Ethics — 8. The Science of Ethics — 9. Kantian Ethics and its Postulates — 10. Science and Ethics — II. The Real and the Ideal^ 12, The Technical Character of Morality — 13. Spiritualism, Idealism, and Naturalism — 14. Morals as a Technical Process, III. Individual and Social Ethics. 15. The Arts and Ethics — 16. Social Ethics — 17. The Moral Consciousness — 18. The Data of Reason — 19. Rational Conduct — 20. Duty and Moral Worth — 21. Individual Dignity, IV. The Different Modes of Ethical Research. 22. The Kantian Method^2'^. Plato and Aristotle — 24. Adam Smith — 25. Spencer— 26, Conclusion on Method, I ETHICS, METAPHYSICS, AND REtlGION. Ethics, Metaphysics, and Religion. I. The Moral Crisis. As the spirit of criticism develops, as simple faith, superstitions, and even traditions lose their influence over the masses, and as the increasing complexity of social, political, and economical relations involves more instability, more risk of disorder and dis- aggregation, we more and more appreciate, from the constant increase of crime, the dangers of moral anarchy. During the whole of the nineteenth century the evolution of ideas and collective sentiments, the increase in the number of publications of every kind — books, pamphlets, journals, etc. — and of public lectures, have introduced into the great current of popular thought a considerable number of practical conceptions, which are, however, conflicting and often irreconcilable. Our age is an age of criticism ; the foundations of law have been called in question, and those of traditional law, in parti- cular, have been destroyed; the family, the city, civil and religious society have been profoundly modified in the course of a single century. Reli- gious faith has ceased to play the important r61e which seemed to have devolved upon it; on ever}'' side it is disappearing, or at any rate is ceasing to be an obstacle to immorality. And in the same manner the " social conscience," if we may use this term to designate the sum-total of conceptions and sentiments which are common to a whole race. MORALS IN THE ANCIENT WORLD. 3 seems to be in a state of hesitation, wavering, and uncertainty, and to be passing through stages of groping in the dark, of sudden shock, and of perilous crisis. There seems to be nothing to guarantee stability in morals; the ideas of good and evil, of justice and injustice, of what is lawful and what is for- bidden, seem more and more arbitrary, and to have a merely conventional or even a provisional value. 2. Morals in the Ancient World. Was not the existence of this state of confusion inevitable, and was it not, after all, for the best? When "social disintegration" had reached its maximum in ancient Greece, two ethical doctrines, which have persisted as types to the present day, made their appearance, and were favourably re- ceived by those who had remained unaffected by the subtle dialectic of Plato or the masterly metaphysic of Aristotle. In the realm of morals, it was not long before Stoicism and Epicureanism became rivals throughout the civilised world, and philosophical conceptions became definitely supreme in ethics. Stoicism, it is true, disappeared after a few cen- turies of incomparable lustre, and was superseded by Christianity, for which it had in some measure prepared a lasting triumph. Religion once more took as its directing principle the care of souls, and henceforth assumed the r6le of the faithful guardian of true morality, the deadly enemy of materialism and atheism, which it persistently and unfairly accused of corrupting morals and of destroying 4 ETHICS, METAPHYSICS, AND RELIGION. the sense of duty by the suppression of every sanction. Must we assume that the moral crisis of the present day will end in the same manner? Can philosophy and religion help us now as they helped the ancient world? It is very doubtful. In the first place, the conditions are different. The ancient world never reached a state of social complexity comparable to that to which we have been brought by the political and economical progress of the century which has just drawn to a close; most of the problems which we have to solve are entirely new. Slavery, the condition of woman in Greece and Rome, the absence of power- ful machinery and vast industrial centres, the lack of consideration paid to human dignity, the inade- quate development of scientific ideas and humani- tarian tendencies, — all these made the solution of the moral problem a much easier task than it is at present. What, in fact, is Stoicism, but a doctrine of tension due to reaction against a general relaxation of morals and a general weakening of the will? Epicureanism, on the other hand, is purely a doctrine of apathy springing directly from dis- couragement, from the absence of conviction, a doctrine which laid desolate the Greek world at the very moment when Pyrrhonism was endeavour- ing, if not actually to destroy action, at least to deprive it of every motive. The spirit of the civilised world had then passed that celebrated stage at which speculations, however bold, did not disturb the equilibrium of the mental or of the moral faculties; in which a Plato or an Aristotle could MORAL PHILOSOPHY. 5 safely propose to mankind an unrealisable ideal, too confident in the wisdom of their contemporaries to fear that they were diverging from the golden mean. On every side was heard the eager question — What shall we do? And with equal eagerness men adopted the simple solutions vC^ithin the grasp of the ordinary intellect — avoid action, endure suffering, resist evil, — solutions which were rather inspired by the cir- cumstances of the case than by the genius of an individual. Stoicism and Epicureanism^ have not been popular and have had no effect on morals, because the two corresponding moral theories were the immediate outcome of the social state at a period of decadence. Their success is to be explained rather by socio- logical considerations than by an examination of their respective values, and in particular of their value from the philosophical point of view. 3. Moral Philosophy. It is farther noticeable that philosophy up to the present time has not been prone to determine men to action ; it has remained rather speculative than practical, whether it has an a priori foundation or the scientific basis which is usually attributed to it. — The morality taught by most philosophers is gene- rally a series of deductions based on metaphysical principles. These principles have a value that is entirely subjective ; it is readily seen that they vary with each school of thought, that they are in mutual conflict, and that they fall into discredit, being the ' Cf. Guyau, La Morale d* Epicure, p. 186 : " Epicureanism had a success and excited in its disciples an enthusiasm of which no modern doctrine can give the slightest idea." — Tr. 6 ETHICS, METAPHYSICS, AND RELIGION. subject of unceasing controversy. Their basis, if empirical, is unsound, because of the Hmited number of facts observed, and we can then confront them with principles for which with equal weight an equally incomplete experience claims sanction. Be- sides, the ordinary mind cannot revert to those very general principles which the philosopher reaches by means of subtle analysis, and which alone give value to deductions and precepts. Finally, a philosophical system is generally too adventitious a part of the social future for the morality which is therewith con- nected to have any influence on long-established morals, or on minds confused by the disorder of social forces. Karl Marx was therefore right when he spoke of the " Poverty of Philosophy " and of its powerlessness, either to prevent or to remedy moral crises. 4. Powerlessness of Philosophy. M. Fouill^e considers ^ that, just as it was said to the poets — " Shame on the men who can sing while Rome is burning," so under the present circum- stances we should "tell the philosophers that they ought not to be content with speculation when questions of life and death are in the air." But what can philosophers do, if they are reduced to a general knowledge of the world, and deal with a hasty and provisional systematisation of hypotheses laid down by experts in every branch of science ? The general philosophy of science plays a more and more limited part, and that part is to constantly endeavour to realise the unity of knowledge by co-ordinating data of which we feel assured, and hypotheses which do ^ La France au Point de Vue morale. POWERLESSMES^ 6P pHilosophV. ^ not conflict with these data. This cosmological work affects action but little, but it is perhaps worth a man's while to realise with increasing accuracy his place in the universe, to experience a sense of modesty when his own insignificance is brought home to him, and a sense of legitimate pride when he appreciates the part his race has played in the course of universal evolution. But that lays down for him no well-defined line of conduct, and we may well be amused to see philosophers deducing from a few vague cosmological premisses an equally vague formula of duty, compelled as they are to further the future of the race, to develop to the utmost the psychic forces, and to secure their triumph over the unconscious energies at work in the universe.^ If all philosophy must issue in morality, according to the paraphrase of the fundamental axiom of dualistic spiritualism, it is certainly unnecessary to speculate with so much heat. Apart from rational cosmology, theology cannot teach us our duty, for if it were to expound to us the sovereign will, it would be compelled to presuppose morality, in order to secure its right to represent it as the supreme rule for human will ; and as its God would have to be the moral Ideal, it could only be conceived in accordance with a moral theory. Of all the philosophical movements of the last century the most important, if we measure importance by the effect produced on the ordinary mind, has certainly been evolutionism. What influence has it had on public morality? The interest it aroused was mainly due to the hostility of the clergy, both Catholic and ^ This formula is due to Rudolf MuUer in his NaturwUsemchaftliche SuUnforschung^ vol. ix. pp. 585 et seq. 8. ETHICS, METAPHYSICS, AND RELIGION. Protestant ;^ it very soon assumed the character of bold negation, with respect to the morality of theology and of religious belief; but this agitation was futile from the practical point of view — nothing was gained by bringing home the cause of moral unity only to the upright conscience and the en- lightened mind. 5. Powerlessness of Religion. If philosophy appears to be completely powerless, may we at least believe that a great religious move- ment would succeed in remedying moral anarchy? Contrary to Spencer's view, religion appears from its origin to have been intimately associated with the moral development of humanity. M. Durkheim^ even considers that all other social phenomena (morality included) have issued by way of dissociation from the religious phenomenon; the relationship began by being an essentially religious bond. At most we can ask ourselves if economic organisation is an exception, and is derived from another source. " M. Belot ^ thinks that religion in its early stages contained morality, not like living matter which con- tains forms which may afterwards be revealed," but " like a shell which protects the embryo, and which covers and conceals to a very large extent the spon- taneous work of which almost all life consists." However this point of detail may be decided, it is difficult even to some of our contemporaries to com- ^ White's Hisiory of the Conflict between Science and Religion. '-^ AnnU sociolo^qtte (2nd year, 1897-98), "Definition des Pheno- menes religieux." 3 **La Religion comnre Principe sociologique,** Revue philoso- phiquey March 1900, p. 290. POWERLESSNESS OF RELIGION. Q pletely separate ethical from religious idealism, so inti- mate has their union been for many generations. However, M. Fouill^e shows, by invoking the testi- mony of eminent Catholics such as MM. d'Hulst, Guibert, and Cardinal Bourret, that religious prac- tices become more and more capable of association with a fundamental immorality. It seems that a religious crisis due to the decay of religious senti- ments has followed almost every stage of the moral crisis- This is the inverse of what was occasionally maintained when religious feeling was made the condition of morality; the latter would rather con- dition the former. Doubtless there are stages in every social evolution in which theological dogma presides over the educa- tion of youth, in which priests fashion at their will the intellect and the heart ; but a sacerdotal body is only powerful, that is to say, really powerful, so long as it is subject to the influence of existing morals and of the ethical current. This the writers above mentioned express very clearly, when they attribute the decreasing influence of the clergy on public morality to their remoteness from the concerns of everyday life, to their intellectual inertia, and to their ignorance of the general tendencies of modern society. We cannot, therefore, count on religion, so called, to put an end to the moral crisis; religion only influences those minds which are in need of belief, and to whom a prophet or a saint brings the faith for which they crave. The rapid propagation of Christianity is explained from a purely sociological^ point of view by the ^ /.^., leaving out of account the belief in the Divinity of Christ. 10 ETHICS, METAPHYSICS, AND RELIGION. aspirations of a throng of freedmen and slaves, who welcomed it enthusiastically because they craved pity, love, and fraternity. The preaching of Moham- med responded in a similar manner to the mystical and warlike tendencies of the Arab tribes, the ethnical character of which assures the persistence of Islamism. But among the more intelligent and more educated peoples of the white race, that similarity of sentiments and tendencies which favours great reli- gious movements could not persist. The era of great enthusiasm seems closed, at any rate to our European civilisation. That is why we appeal ^ to the clergy of the different denominations to aid religious faith by the help of psychology and sociology. It is now obvious that the sharpness of the moral crisis cannot be diminished by philosophy alone, nor by religion alone, nor by philosophy and religion combined — for what assistance can one bring to the other? It may be that ethical religion contributes from the very loftiness of its morality to the realisation of the most complete possible moral unity in humanity; but its work ought to be preceded in every case by that of the thinkers and the savants, who, after having learned to look on man both as a psycholo- gical and as a social being, would endeavour to agree on the first principles of human conduct. 6. Conditions of Morality. Sometimes it is only by social action exercised on every class of society and individual that moral work can be accomplished, and that crisis met which is ^ M. Fouillee, for example, in his recent volume, La France au PoitU de Vue morale. CONDITIONS OF MORALITY. 11 due to the divergence of individual views. Now dog- matism, under whatever form it presents itself, cannot be an acceptable remedy. Truth is not imposed by brute force; it is proposed by some, accepted by others, and becomes common thought by the free adhesion of minds. Everything . that enters into belief by pathological suggestion, in consequence of a morbid receptivity of the intellect, may be expelled in the same way in which it was introduced. The ethics taught by a master will only become the real morality of the race if it is discussed, criticised, and admitted by reason, and never from sheer weakness of will or mental indolence. Hence, every man must make his own morality, and must be therefore rendered capable of making it for himself; he must be enlightened, guided, advised, and placed in a position to judge, so that theory may determine a practice which suits him. Then, either there will be an inevitable divergence, and we shall have to give up moral unity and submit to an indefinite prolongation of the present crisis, or an agreement will take place which will at any rate put an end to dissensions on essential points. Now the primary characteristic of science is that it brings minds into agreement by furnishing them with universal and necessary principles. We may therefore hope that moral unity will be realised if ethics can be based on science in general, or on one of the sciences in particular. 12 SCIENTIFIC MORALITY. II. Scientific Morality. 7. Independent Ethics. Scientific psychology has been reproached with being soulless; this reproach is really praise, for a metaphysical theory of the soul, whether materialistic or spiritualistic, realistic or idealistic, can only viti- ate any scientific investigation into the nature of phenomena. In the same manner, to accuse scienti- fic morality of being a practical doctrine without theology or preliminary metaphysics is also praise. No doubt every scientific application assumes certain philosophic postulates which criticism has readily discovered: for instance, that there are laws of nature; that the principle of causality is of universal value, and of necessary application to phenomena, etc. This is used to prove — poor victory — that every philosopher and moralist alike does the same without hesitation, so that neither science nor ethics is independent of philosophic criticism. This assertion of the rights of philosophy is per- fectly legitimate. There are philosophic truths, the most general of all, which have such an objectivity that one runs no risk in admitting them. Empiricism and rationalism, realism and idealism, only come into actual conflict in the region of unverifiable hypotheses; and science and ethics need not follow philosophy into this region. The independence which is claimed by ethics is not THE SCIENCE OF ETHICS. I3 independence with respect to philosophic criticism; most contemporary thinkers consider, with Kant, that nothing can escape criticism, ethics no more than religion or science. But the right that is accorded to criticism to push its investigations as far as possible into the first principles of every science or every theory, into their nature, and even into their value, does not go so far as to justify the making of ethics a mere dependency of philosophy. 8. The Science of Ethics. M. Renouvier has not hesitated to write "of the science of ethics as a science which is at first a pure science and subsequently an applied science, under the name of the principles of law."^ He has even compared this new science to mathematics, the simplicity and rigour of which science seem, how- ever, but ill adapted to favour such a comparison. " Mathematics and ethics have this much in common, if they claim to be sciences they must be based on pure concepts. Experience and history are further from representing the laws of ethics than nature is from the accurate realisation of mathe- matical ideas; but these laws and ideas are rational forms equally necessary, the one to be the rule of the senses, and the other to guide and form a judgment on life."^ But this science which is so near to the scientific ideal must be based on a philosophic doc- trine, "for nothing can overthrow one doctrine but another doctrine; there is a philosophy, and one alone, which satisfies this condition of being, a ^ Ch. Renouvier, Science de la Morale^ Paris (Ladrange), 1869. 2 Renouvier, op, cit,. Preface. 14 SCIENTIFIC MORALITY. doctrine Which is distinct from the rest, and that is critical philosophy, . . . because it is itself, in so far as it examines, or criticises, or analyses represen- tations, either a science already, or the beginning of science in every question which is a subject of con- troversy among philosophers." It is to be feared that M. Renouvier exaggerates the need of critical philosophy to a science which finds in experience and in history those approximations, the rectification or completion of which would provide us with perfect types of moral actions, and which at the same time are sufficient to draw up the data of experience and to translate them into perfect geo- metrical forms. Ethics is in much more urgent need-^and M. Renouvier himself explicitly admits it — of the methodic study of psychological and socio- logical facts both present and past. 9. Kantian Ethics and its Postulates. Is not the "critical philosophy" of which M. Renouvier speaks almost identical with the philo- sophy of Kant, modified no doubt as far as belief in the noumenon is concerned, but kept intact by the neo-criticists as far as it affects practical reason ? Now Kant, no doubt, had the merit of taking duty as his point of departure, a "rational fact"; that is to say of such a universality as cannot be misunder- stood, and as is imposed on all adult and reflective minds. As M. Dugas^ has remarked, the idea of duty is common to all moral doctrine, although it has not always been distinguished from the less abstract conceptions which envelop it. " It is not ^ Revue philosophique^ 1897, t. xliv. p. 390. KANTIAN ETHICS AND ITS POSTULATES. 15 foreign to hedonistic morality, and it is essential to utilitarian ethics, even when reduced to egoism." Naturalistic morality has closely connected it with this moral sentiment which, as Darwin says, "we define by saying it must be obeyed." In every theory which distinguishes the moral good from every other good it is this which must be acquired or realised. Kant was therefore right in devoting himself to researches which expose him to the charge of " for- malism," but none the less remain a valuable example of philosophical analysis. But after having made ethics the doctrine of obligation, has he in the sequel safeguarded in- dependence ? Have not metaphysical and theological ideas affected deductions which are apparently rigorous and impartial ? The Critique of Pure Reason already shows that Kant had a keen desire to restore belief in God, in the immortality of the soul, and in liberty — a belief which was destroyed by the disputes of philo- sophers, and, which could not be established save upon new foundations. Further, Kant also proceeds to make of liberty, which is unintelligible to us because it exists in " the intelligible world," the ratio essendi of duty; of future sanction, the consequence of moral obligation; and of the existence of God, the consequence of sanction beyond the tomb. Hence it seems that morality has for its sole aim the restoration of the idols which criticism destroys. Not only is ethics thus taken as the means, not only does it cease to be a real aim, but it is also placed in relative opposition to the criticism on which we profess to base it. It is as much the slave of metaphysics and theology as ever. l6 SCIENTIFIC MORALITY. But now its servitude is more disguised, and is even veiled under the form of supremacy. lo. Science and Ethics. We must, on the contrary, have a morality estab- lished as science is, without preconceived ideas, without prejudice, without the secret intention of issuing in the justification of an opinion, be it meta- physical, or religious, or political. The moralist, like the savant, must at the beginning of his investiga- tions be ignorant of the point at which he will emerge, and must therefore be a man of no particular school. But can he do what may be fairly called scientific work ? M. Durkheimi admits with M. Renouvier the possibility of constructing "a science of ethics." The moralists, he says, " who deduce their doctrine not from an a priori principle, but from certain pro- positions borrowed from one or more positive sciences, qualify their scientific morality." ^ Our aim is not to deduce ethics from science, but to construct the science of ethics, which is quite a different matter. For that purpose M. Durkheim "undertakes to determine the reasons of an experi- mental order on which morality is formed, trans- formed, and maintained," to study the rules of action ^ La Division du Travail social ^ Preface. Paris, Alcan, 1893. '^ The term " scientific " has been sometimes quite wrongly applied to certain moral doctrines by intellects even as keen as that of M. Bout- roux, who seems to believe that scientific morality is compelled to follow the lines of the natural sciences, and therefore must in these days l)e informed by the transformist, evolutionist, and even the materialistic spirit. It is scarcely necessary to point out the abuse of terms which leads one to qualify as scientific that morality which is connected with a scientific hypothesis of indefinite value. THE REAL AND THE IDEAL. l^ laid down for the individual by collectivity, as well as by all the other facts of social constraint which have given birth to the morals of different epochs and of different countries. M. Durkheim would scout the idle objection that science only studies what is or has been. The scientific knowledge of what is or has been may well give an idea of what will be, but not of what ought to be, should be, or would have been. Science, says the sociologist, " can help us to find the direction in which we should orientate our conduct, and to determine the ideal towards which we are but blindly groping. Only, we cannot raise ourselves to that ideal until we have observed the real and extricated ourselves from it. But is it possible to proceed in any other way? Even the most intemperate idealists cannot follow any other method, for the ideal rests on nothing if it is not rooted in reality." ^ II. The Real and the Ideal. It seems that M. Durkheim and M. Renouvier are fundamentally agreed that the real needs rectification, and that rectification is possible. It is true that the latter expects it from pure reason, by an operation analogous to that by which mathematics is consti- tuted, while the former counts on a kind of induction founded on experience, thanks to which we can establish a law of social evolution, a social type which may be realised. " The objective that science offers to the will " is a " normal type entirely in agreement with itself, which has eliminated or redressed the contradictions, that is to say, the ^ Durkheim, op, cit.^ p. 4. 2 l8 SCIEKTII^IC MORALITY. imperfections, which it contained." M. Durkheim therefore gives to sociology a r61e which M. Renouvier refuses to it, and it cannot be denied that the former has the true scientific spirit which, in proportion as the fact to be studied becomes more and more complex, awards a wider r61e to observation, to experiment, and to induction. But wide as may be the r61e that is given by M. Durkheim to social science, the latter cannot be confused with ethics. If social science were ethics, it could only " make of us spectators indifferent or resigned to reality," ^ forcing itself with the Stoic sage to learn the natural law in order to have further knowledge of what it reserves to us, whither it teads us, and whither, in the words of Cleanthes,^ it would lead us if, in a frenzy at its restrictions, we should refuse to observe it and to follow it. " If we know in what direction the evolution of the right of property is taking place as societies be- come more voluminous and dense, and if some fresh increase of volume and density necessitates fresh modifications, we can foresee them, and foreseeing them we can will them in advance." This is the Stoic morality, consisting solely in the pursuit of nature, in " Ufe in conformity with the natural law," which sociology reveals to us as rigidly as a law in physics or astronomy; but we are as little content with that as is M. Dijrkheim. Thus some knowledge of a higher order than social science must regulate our conduct under certain circumstances, in which it is not enough to ^ /. cit.y chap, xix., vol. ii. pp. 76 et seq, — Tr, SELF-PERCEPTION. 59 a "motor"; he runs the risk of quite a different conception of the modes of activity ; the conduct of an artist, a painter, a sculptor, or a musician who "visualises" or "hears" v^ith an intensity which sometimes lands him on the threshold of hallucina- tion wall not have the same aspect, or perhaps even the same principles, as the conduct of a workman who realises the motor type, or of a tradesman whose type has remained undetermined. We are constantly seeing artists, musicians especially, make themselves remarkable by some eccentricity in their conduct; we find, on the other hand, that different subjects, with an average apti- tude to experience every kind of sensation, have not only plenty of good sense from the purely intellectual point of view, but also a well-marked taste for moderation in conduct and for regularity in morals. If we now endeavour to discover why the sensorial diverges from the indifferent type, we must attribute a very nearly equal share to the influence of heredity, which is manifested by the organic aptitudes and the congenital tendencies of the mind, and to the influence of education, habits, and acquired tendencies. 32. Self -perception. The nature of special aptitudes from the point of view of sensation and perception is of great im- portance, particularly in relation to action, because of the quite peculiar manner in which the subject per- ceives itself, according to the sensorial type to which it belongs. One point that the psychologists have not, as a rule, thrown into sufficient relief, is that of personal perception. It has often been said that we 60 THE MORAL WILL. perceive ourselves just as we perceive objects external to us ; sufficient stress has not been laid on the con- sequences of this objective representation, which is much more complex than the idea of the ego upon which, almost exclusively, the attention of philo- sophers has been fixed. The idea of the ego and the perception of self are two physical facts as different as the conception of a body in general and the con- crete representation of a determined body. If to apprehend oneself is a mental operation analogous to every other objective apprehension, we imagine more than we find; we reinstate many more elements than are actually given ; we fuse the past and the present. In accordance with certain sensations, for the most part organic, we conceive ourselves as concrete beings habitually presenting definite characters, in which we have taken more note in the past of certain aspects than of others, according to the constantly predomi- nant tendency of our mind, according to the sense of experience which is most pronounced in us. If one person perceives himself in particular qua an auditive or more especially qua a "speculative or an in- tellectual," another will perceive himself most often as a " motor," in particular, and more especially, as active and practical. No doubt we perceive our- selves in situations so different that the same in- dividual may be turning attention sometimes to his speculative aptitudes, and sometimes to his practical aptitudes; but it is none the less true that each of us has a usual way of conceiving himself dependent on the habitual preponderance in clear consciousness of muscular images and sensations in preference, for instance, to auditory or visual images. Can it be denied that this exercises the greatest INSTABILITY AND ABOULIA. 6l influence over the nature of the acts which we con- ceive ? An action is always the action of a deter- mined person, and to conceive it is to conceive the accomplishment of a movement, or a series of move- ments, by a given agent. We represent, more or less vaguely, and always from some specific point of view, a concrete being. This being has certain habitual characteristics, and some aspects of its nature have caught our attention more than others; and if we are ourselves the agent, we clearly only conceive that which can have the closest relations to our own nature. In other words, because we cannot separate the act from the agent, the conception of an act that we can accomplish cannot be separated from the concrete representation that we have of ourselves. And that is why an athlete, whose mind is full of images of struggle, exercises, and muscular con- tractions, etc., who perceives himself habitually not so much an intelligent and reasonable being, as a vigorous organism and a system of powerful muscles, will more readily conceive of recourse to force and violence than of recourse to argument, to dialectic, or to persuasion. ^;i. Instability and A boulia. Men having neither stable temperament nor firm character, easily change their type, and in certain pathological cases successively exhibit different as- pects (the alternating personalities of hysterical subjects), and sometimes experience a great diffi- culty in conceiving action ; it seems as if the source of practical life is exhausted in them. We call them aboulic, but they lack will especially because of their 62 THE MORAL WILL. mental instability, which prevents them from having a clear conception of themselves. Defective personal perception involves more or less marked defect in practical conceptions. How could such beings ever raise themselves very high in the moral hierarchy ? No idea attains in their mind sufficient clearness to determine voluntary action, or even to arouse deliberation; for clearness of representations in general, an^ of practical conceptions in particular, proceeds from the attention which is given to them — that is to say, in short, from their agreement with the deeply rooted and constant tendencies of a subject. When the tendencies are only fugitive, there is only weakness of attention, and therefore incapacity from the practical point of view; and what better sign could be found of the instability of tendencies than the absence of a constant self-con- ception, of a personal perception varying insensibly save in details of secondary importance ? To sum up: the first stage of moral action, the conception of practical possibilities, appears to us as a psychological fact varying with the individual but closely connected with his character, and of the highest importance from the point of view of eleva- tion, value, and of decision itself. For if the choice is made among the possible courses that are con- ceived, how can we choose acts which are wide in their moral scope if we are found incapable of con- ceiving such acts ? 34. Deliberation. The conception of an act as simply possible, and not as necessary, involves the consideration of the DELIBERATION. 63 following question : Will it be realised, will it be in the form in which it was conceived, or in a new form requiring a new conception (which this time is made in the course of deliberation, in virtue of the incessant modification of the content of the consciousness) ? It may be affirmed that in most voluntary acts, if not in all, the primitive conceptions are modified by the sole fact that one hesitates in their immediate realisation, and that they are submitted to an ex- amination. In fact this examination is always arousing motives and sentiments in favour of or opposed to the project in question, which thus appears in a new form at every step taken in the process of deliberation. As M. Bergsen has clearly pointed out,^ we too often neglect to consider the incessant progress made in the mind by a practical idea of which we are examining the advantages and the disadvantages; instead of remaining fixed as a thing, this idea participates in the movement of the thought, in the life of the "soul," that totality of images, of ideas, of emotions, and of actions, the existence of which is conditioned by instability. Sometimes, deliberation and conception have been contrasted, not only as we have just contrasted them, for the purposes of analysis, but by distinguishing them carefully one from another, as two successive phases which cannot overlap. To deliberate, how- ever, is in a sense to continue the work of the con- ception of an act until the synthesis of the motor images is sufficiently powerful in the consciousness to determine the corresponding muscular exertions. But at this second stage it is no longer imagina- tion, mental association, and memory which play the ^ Les Dannies immcdiates de la Conscience, 64 THE MORAL WILL. principal r6le; it is the sentiments, the emotions, and the tendencies, the reasonings and the beliefs. A practical idea arises in the mind by the partly sub-conscious play which we have described above; it immediately pleases or displeases; it is in conflict with or is favoured by certain beliefs; it is in agree- ment or disagreement with certain principles, pre- judices, scientific axioms, or simple judgments of the aesthetic taste; and finally, with the aid of certain general propositions, the mind deduces the particular consequences of the act proposed; or rather, that act is brought into relation with other particular analo- gous facts, and from them is derived a particular rule, which is or is not in harmony with rules which have been previously admitted. ' This is a summary description of the processus of deliberation ; the pro- cessus is repeated more or less completely as many times as the idea is even ever so slightly modified; so that sometimes deliberation is of considerable duration, which may be an index of the always very great complexity of such a mental act. It is easily seen that when it is a question of a moral act to be deliberately accomplished, the nature of the psychic processus is very complex. Kant,^ in his far too summary psychology, only admitted one motive of moral conduct ; he held that only the sentiment of respect for the law of duty, an a priori sentiment, and the only one we can conceive as necessary, should de- termine the choice of the reasonable being. Delibera- tion could not therefore be of long duration, hesitation was not permitted, all other sentiments but moral respect being at once avoided as " pathological.*' ^ Cf. Bradley, Ethical Studies^ Essay iv. ; Mackenzie, 0}). cit. , chap. V. ; Sidj wick, Outlines of the History of Ethic s^ p. 272. — Tr. DELIBERATION. 63 It is true, no doubt, that Kant recognised that whatever be a man's morahty he has never yet acted out of pure respect for the moral law. His theory, ipso facto, applies to superhuman beings. An ethical doctrine which professes to direct the conduct of men ought to take into account the psychological complexity of our nature. " Nothing,*' says M. Renouvier,^ " could do more to prevent the diffusion of the principles of Kant in the world than to require — so uselessly for the foundations of this theory, so vainly when we consider man as he is constituted, and even human nature as we can understand it — that action, to be morally good, must be exempt from passion. He himself con- fessed that he did not know if any action of the kind had ever taken place; and I may add, that I do not know if the purely rational agent, sup- posing such an agent were possible, would be morally superior to the purely 'passionate' agent, being given identical data of action. I think it is doubtful." Contemporary disciples of Kant have recognised that ** passion is part of a man's nature ";2 that there are sentiments (such as love) which may be approved by reason ; and finally, that " the general agreement between sentiment and reason is complete" in the conception of a really human ideal. " Every thesis which definitively separates the elements of human nature is erroneous. Man is an order, a harmony of reciprocally conditioned and therefore inseparable functions." The occasionally dramatic character of deliberation is due to the conflict of different tendencies. The ^ Science de la Morale^ p. 185. ^ Renouvier, ibid, 5 66 THE MORAL WILL. opposition of the vilest and the most generous pas- sions, or the grossest appetites and the loftiest inclinations, compels the mind of the moral agent to pass through peculiarly exciting alternatives when it is a question of critical determinations. The more a mind is developed, the more numerous are the tendencies which a practical conception " awakens, and associates itself with for the purpose of strengthening or weakening itself," if one may use such expressions, considering the ideas as capable of attraction or repulsion, and of association with the emotions, the inclinations, the desires, etc. In reality it is the personal consciousness which be- comes this or that, which successively admits according to its law of evolution, according to its fundamental nature, sometimes one tendency, some- times another, this in turn giving place to a third; while others, less clearly perceived at first, approach the point of apperception, or prepare for the appear- ance of another. 35. The Conscious Processes. The conflict is not so much a struggle between simultaneously presented elements, as a succession of facts of consciousness, which being incapable of simultaneous presence in clear consciousness, must each await its turn; so that each first appears victorious over all the others only to be im- mediately dethroned by its successor. It is of importance on this point to destroy a general misconception, due to the metaphors which are used in the ordinary language of psychologists. They present deliberation as a kind of progressive THE CONSCIOUS PROCESSES. 67 accumulation, in the two scales of a balance, of weight and counterweight, having each its mental effect just as the metal weights have each the physical effect which is inherent in them. Inclina- tions are thus transformed into things, instead of being considered as simple, fugitive modifications of an essentially unstable subject, necessarily in process of change. In reality, in deliberation there is a state of con- sciousness which is being more or less slowly elaborated, which will be complex in proportion as the states of anterior consciousness have been pro- gressively more complex, have each embraced in its synthetic unity an ever-increasing number of ends and feelings. The practical idea gathers like a snow- ball because the thought develops, being maintained in a constant direction by the attention accorded at first to a conception, and maintained and revived unceasingly by the interest the conception offers from several points of view»^ The condition of attention, as we have seen, is that the representations are as concrete as possible, and are closely connected with the interests of the indi- vidual, or associated with the characteristic tendencies of the being. Deliberation is therefore the natural consequence of an interesting conception. If the tendency to which responds the practical idea which has been conceived is a simple tendency, exclusive of any other — a passion or an appetite which demands to be satisfied without our being able to oppose it by another sentiment,— ^then deliberation is immediately concluded. If the direction taken by the mind is less unilinear, if the attention is attracted in different ^ Cf. James, oJ>, cU,, ii. 528.— Tr. 68 THE MORAL WILL. directions, thanks to the intrusion of different inte- rests, then deliberation lasts until the oscillations of the attention cease.^ In the animal the attention is especially unilinear, and that is why in the conduct towards man of the inferior beings there is no important modification or prolonged hesitation; the appetite of the animal carries it at once 'by the shortest and the easiest way, and therefore most often by hereditary means, to realisation or ends which are always the same, or vary but little from generation to generation. During three-quarters of his existence man is no doubt purely and simply an animal; instead of reasoning he is often content to infer; instead of willing he repeats and imitates; instead of discussing he obeys; and there is no greater tyranny than that of habits of mind fortified by collective custom, fashion, and social constraint, to which, as we shall see farther on, we give way unconsciously, and which dictate in many cases our conduct, pointing out the means and the ends. 36. Irreflection and Good Manners. The distinction between manners and morality depends entirely on the fact that we may have good manners according to the environment in which we live without having real morality, and unmoral good manners are created the more easily in proportion as we are the slaves of custom, tradition, the require- ments of our age, country, caste, or city, and in proportion as we live mechanically, the sport of exterior influences. To examine human nature from the point of view ^ James, op. cit,^ ii. 529. — Tr. IRREFLECTION AND GOOD MANNERS. 69 of the action which is most in conformity with that nature itself, taken in all its complexity, we can con- ceive of a mode of determination superior to that of so many people who have only good manners, who only choose in reality what others have chosen for them, and only approve of what is approved in their own environment, etc. People of this type never expe- rience the feeling, almost approaching anguish,^ which is not infrequent in the being who meditates, sees the inconveniences and the advantages, and has to decide in spite of his doubts, in spite of apprehensions which are often stronger in pro- portion to the length and the conscientiousness of his reflection. Such a man has evidently used a human privilege ; some may say that it is a melancholy privilege ; human nature has what are obviously defects, but defects to which its greatness when compared to animal nature is due. If the beasts have instinct with its relative certainty and invariability, they have not the merit of a voluntary decision which is sometimes painful, and sometimes unfortunate, in spite of good inten- tions, but which is still a decision alone worthy of a being who aspires to self-guidance. Facts show that most men, and especially those whom the majority consider as the best representa- tives of the human race, believe that the superiority of man over the other animals springs from that multilinear attention which M. Ribot distinguishes from animal attention by calling the one spontaneous and the other voluntary. It is therefore agreed that in the present conditions of human existence we * Video meliora proboqite^ deUriora sequor. — OviD, Metain.y vii. 20.— Tr. 70 THE MORAL WILL. must attribute the greatest importance to the diver- sities of the tendencies in deliberation. 37. The Choice of the Best. Now when a man deliberates on the investment of his fortune, — if he chooses, for instance, to build a comfortable house rather than to invest his money in the funds or in property, — what determines his choice is the desire to satisfy the tendency which he thinks the best. It would be absurd for him to satisfy himself by the gratification of a desire or of an appetite of which he disapproved ; it would be at once self- approval and self-disapproval to consider a tendency as evil and to act as if it were good. No doubt a man may openly disapprove with his lips, and yet at the bottom of his heart approve of one and the same tendency, and all the time be acting quite bond fide; for not infrequently are we led by our reasoning to conclusions which we do not trust, and which we formulate without conviction, under the influence of a logic which is that of the lan- guage and the mind, but at which the passion that, in spite of all cavil, possesses us, is moved to mirth. What is impossible, and Socrates^ clearly saw this, is that we should know one thing to be good and proclaim another to be bad, sincerely and from the bottom of our hearts, and yet in spite of this that we should choose the latter. For that to be so, according to Aristotle,*^ we can only have a general recognition of good and evil, and we must blunder in our reasoning in passing from the general to the particular. * Meno, 77.— Tr. - Cf. Ethics, Book IIL, chaps. i.-v.—TR. PRIORITY OF THE TENDENCY OVER THE IDEA. 71 Now the good, from the point of view of the psychologist, is simply the object of a desire, of a tendency. The idea of the good is only universal because the tendency is, every tendency responding to ithe category of end. Tendencies differ, and so do the different forms of the gQod ; and just as certain tend- encies conflict and others overlap, so there are irreconcilable forms of the good, and forms of the good which serve as means to the realisation of higher forms. The conflict between tendencies corresponds to a definitive or transient opposition of ends or forms of good. 38. Priority of the Tendency over the Idea of the Good. But is it the end which determines the tendency, or is it the tendency we have experienced which makes us conceive of certain ends and forms of good ? This is the question recently asked by the physio- logical psychologists, as they are sometimes called in opposition to the psychologists of the intellectualistic school. To the former it is the outlined movement which by its direction reveals the end to which the vital processus tends; by taking into account the biological modifications and their object we acquire the psychological notion of tendency. Natural adaptation is therefore anterior to conscious finality, just as movement is to intention, or the reflex action to the voluntary act. It follows that we are not conscious of all the tendencies of our being, of the appetites which govern us and determine us without our knowledge, and which combine we know not how. We outline 72 THE MORAL WILL. our movements, and we are not the masters of these outlines of action. Their fundamental determinism causes the determinism of our voluntary deliberations. This determinism of psychic by biological facts, and this subordination of conscious tendencies to uncon- scious appetites, are of the utmost importance in the examination of deliberation and of voluntary choice, especially when that choice is moral. If the good is the aim of the tendency (instead of determining the tendency itself, as most philosophers and moralists suppose), each will conceive the supreme good according to his predominant tendency, and this tendency will triumph over the others in energy and constancy, not by a free act, not in virtue of an inex- plicable decision of the mysterious will, but in virtue of that biological determinism which is expressed by the word "temperament" or "character.'' . 39. Moral Subjectivism. Hence, each will conceive the good in his own way, according to his psycho-physiological nature, and will be led by that nature to one choice rather than to another, since in the succession of phenomena of which deliberation is composed, the tendencies appear each in its turn, and all save one disappear, whether they are eliminated altogether or blended with that which persists, uniting with it in order to definitively fix the attention. Undoubtedly this scientific datum, if exact and exclusive of every other datum more favourable to morality, runs the risk of inducing us to abandon purely and simply every attempt to exercise by theories, discourses, or exhor- tations, any influence whatever on the determinations UNIFICATION OF TENDENCIES AND HEREDITY. 73 of our fellows. Those alone can be convinced of the excellence of a form of good, whose tendencies are orientated and hierarchised in the direction of that good ; those who have an ardent and passionate tem- perament will necessarily adopt a hedonist morality; those whose temperament is cold will only compre- hend a utilitarian morality; in short, we must adapt moral theories to the different temperaments, and not try to subject all types of man to a single rule. But the scope of individual differences must not be exaggerated; in many cases human solidarity has the same effect as animal instinct with its uniformity and specific character.^ 40. Unification of Tendencies and Heredity, This solidarity has a twofold psychological founda- tion — sympathy and heredity. Sympathy is the mark of an aptitude, as it were, to put oneself in unison with others, especially from the emotional point of view. Such an aptitude allows of the ready propaga- tion, in the crowd, of the emotions, tendencies, and sentiments of a few individuals. It is the cause of spontaneous imitation, alogical, and sometimes illo- gical, and M. Tarde^ has shown us how important this imitation is from the point of view of morals. It creates collective sentiments, emotions, and tend- encies, sometimes so violent that, like individual passions, they tend to destroy all that is opposed to their development ; ipso facto it is the principle of social constraint. Men in more or less numbers, ^ Cf. Guyau, Education and Heredity (Walter Scott), pp. 82, 83.— Tr. •* Les Lois de Vlmitation^ pp. 158-212, sind passim. — Tr. 74 THE MORAL WILL. united by a solidarity of sentiment and therefore of interest, will always try to impose on individuals their manner of seeing and feeling ; and they will only discover that they can not attain their object of imposing it on most isolated minds by a constant repetition of the same acts, inducing a habit, more and more inhibitive to unfavourable reactions. The result is that men living in society (and how can they live otherwise ?) have with few excep- tions mutual solidarity in good as well as evil, and are incapable of isolating themselves to live each according to his own caprice, and according to an original conception. The " gregarious instinct " created the primitive solidarity, that of animals, which M. Durkheim calls "mechanical solidarity."^ Now the gregarious instinct is simply the result of sympathy, of moral contagion, of the constraint naturally exercised on the individual by collectivity. As soon as he became conscious of this instinct, man caused it to disappear as far as its form is concerned ; but he could not destroy its causes, and therefore the most important of these causes still subsist. All society tends to uniformity of manners through uni- formity of emotions, tendencies, and sentiments. This acquired uniformity is made hereditary by the individual or social transmission of aptitudes. The power of tradition cannot be gainsaid. The family forms a complete solidarity of several successive generations; the same spirit animates its different members, characters are brought into harmony, and just as one might give a generic image of the in- dividuals who compose the family aggregate, so one might discover their common character from the 1 op, cii., pp. 73.117.— Tr. UNIFICATION OF TENDENCIES AND HEREDITY. 75 point of view of manners, sentiments, modes of emotional reaction and of appetition. In the city as in the family, in the state as in the city, in the race as in the state, although with diminishing force, may be manifested in the same way the solidarity of successive generations, the more recent inheriting their prejudices and inclina- tions from their predecessors. We must therefore add to the immediate influence of imitation the repeated influences which are exer- cised on ancestral consciousness, and which have contributed to the birth of hereditary tendencies favourable to some modes of conduct and unfavour- able to others. If it is safer not to assert the hereditary transmission of more or less complex ideas, of conceptions as comprehensive as those of a certain moral good, we may believe in the trans- mission of certain appetitions and repulsions which are created by the contact of mind and experience, and which then determine a series of acts and a sum- total of habits, in some measure instinctive, of which it would be difficult for the agent to explain the origin and the formation. These tendencies, which rise one knows not whence, possess an imperious character which can very often convert into categorical imperatives precepts which at first were technical rules or counsels of prudence, or simple forms of obedience to the collective will. The in- dividual who feels rising within him in this way sentiments of obligation of which he does not know the psycho-physiological source, is naturally prone to believe that he hears " the voice of conscience," and that he is benefiting by a " revelation of duty.'* Very often a mgin has a noble or a mean soul be- 76 THE MORAL WILL. cause he is hereditarily predisposed to independence of mind and to freedom, or to docility, humility, and obedience, by the aptitude and manner of action of several preceding generations. We then feel it our duty either to revolt against tyranny, or to assist the weak, or to abstain from every form of cupidity or meanness, or, on the other hand, we are disposed to submission, compliance, or vengeance. We have discussed the individual determinism due to the influence which is exercised by the peculiar temperament and character of each being on his tendencies and his decisions. We now see another determinism, that which springs from the influence exercised on the individual by the social environ- ment in which he lives, and in which his ancestors have lived, an influence which tends to nothing less than to make him as like as possible to his fellow- men. These two determinisms are therefore in conflict, unless the former becomes continuous with the latter, owing to the simple fact that the individual temperament and character are almost entirely forined by the environment and by heredity. Whether the individual tendencies are in harmony or in disagreement with the collective, the latter are none the less important factors, though very often ignored, of voluntary deliberation. In spite of our- selves we are the product of our age, country, and race; and, however keen may be the desire to be singular, even if we wished to push originality to the verge of the bizarre and the eccentric, we cannot succeed, so deeply are we impregnated, so to speak, by the collective spirit. Here, then, is the principal obstacle to the THE REASON. 77 establishment of a morality which has already been successfully attacked; the fundamental sociability of man is opposed to each having his own concep- tion of the good and of practical tendencies, a conception radically different from that of his contemporaries. 41. The Reason. But we have, so far, omitted to remember that man is a reasonable animal, and that in addition to his animal appetites — assuredly born of un- conscious appetitions of the different elements of his being, such as the appetite for food or the sexual appetite — he possesses tendencies to intel- lectual life, such as are afforded by study, medita- tion, the contemplation of beauty, etc. The most empirical psychology may recognise that man experiences pleasure in thinking, acting, and reason- ing in a rational manner. These tendencies, no doubt, do not come to him from the organism; this pleasure is not so clearly psycho - physiological as the other emotions; but it is none the less true that certain savants have had the passion for truth, a passion which has proved the dominant rule of their lives, and that other men — artists, dilettanti, and "believers'* — have had a lasting and fruitful passion for the beautiful, and for the rationally conceived ideal. We must therefore recognise that the desire of living the rational life, so far from not being clearly preponderant in all men, is nevertheless almost uni- versal, and that, as Spinoza said,^ the love of reason 1 Cf. Guyau, La Morale d'ipicure, iii. pp. 235, 236.— Tr, 78 THE MORAL WILL. is of all human tendencies the most capable of bringing us into agreement. We may preach to our fellows the love of reason without the fear that their different temperaments will lead them to turn a deaf ear to us. Even the most passionate almost always wish to act reason- ably, and try to understand and to make their action and their choice understood by indicating the why and the wherefore. If the animal could be questioned as to his acts and his motives he could only argue from the act that he necessarily conceives, and that his nature causes him to conceive; man questioned in the same way, seeks as a rule the reason of his choice in a perfectly human motive, the desire for systematic action,^ and he recognises that he is only wrong when it is proved to him either that his conduct is not coherent or that his choice lacks rationality. It is because reflection on his own nature can give to man these tendencies that pure physiology will never explain them, or will only explain them im- perfectly. Finding that he can learn, man tries to analyse these processes of his knowledge ; he rises to the idea of necessity or law, and from that moment he seeks around him what is necessary — obedience to the law. Necessity implies universality. The law is theoretical or practical. When it is practical, it is called the rule of universal conduct, and thus the love of reason involves respect for the moral law. Kant's psycho- logy was correct when he imagined that he saw this sentiment, which is the motive of the noblest human actions, involved in what is generally called ^ Vide Section 19. THE UNION OF TENDENCIES AND OF REASON. 79 " good will." That is certainly a great psychological truth. Man has a very strong tendency to act from good will — that is to say, out of respect for a rational rule. This tendency may counterbalance the effect of many others, and, in a large measure, may con- tribute to the final decision. 42. The Union of Different Tendencies and of Reason, The desire of acting rationally cannot always be in itself alone the determinant motive of voluntary action; it must be united to others having a more concrete and therefore more attractive object than reason. Intellectual desire only acts energetically on the human mind when it is united to appetites and desires which have their roots in the depths of our psycho-physiological being. Is such an alliance possible ? Kant did not doubt it, because he believed that you will never meet with a man who has acted through pure respect for the moral law and from practical pure reason. And further, every kind of sentiment may present in its totality a rational character, for the desire of realising a system, far from excluding different tendencies, implies on the contrary tendencies as varied as possible. Thus we find what we thought we had lost in the course of our psychological analysis : the possibility of acting on others by moral theories, the faculty that men have of a mutual agree- ment to adopt a rule or a collection of common rules of conduct, which are objective, imposing themselves on all in the name of a power revered by all, a power which is no more exterior than 8o LIBERTY AND MORALITY. interior, and which rather is immanent in each of us, only compelling us to act by means of the influence which we attribute to it. But being reasonable by nature, as by nature we are led to the satisfaction of numerous appetites, we become more or less reasonable as we become more or less impulsive, according to the education we have received, our environment, our circumstances, and the physical, biological, and sociological influences to which we are exposed. Thus we are sometimes more and sometimes less disposed to act rationally. There are ethical civilisations and hedonistic civilisations; others, again, are utilitarian, and others idealist — civilisations of every kind, some more and some less suited to the development of those higher tendencies which are characteristic of human nature. In short, tendencies, whether hereditary or ac- quired, whether part and parcel of our character or preponderant but for the moment (and in these we include rational tendencies), seem, so far, to be the only determinant causes of our moral volitions as much by the influence that they exercise on con- ception and deliberation, as by the choice which they involve. II. Liberty and Morality. 43. Kant and Free Will. What becomes of liberty in the presence of so much determinism ? We know what importance the affirmation or negation of **free will" has KANT AND FREE WILL. 8l assumed in moral theories. Kant admitted as necessary "the supposition of independence with respect to the world of the senses, and that of the existence of a faculty to determine one's own wall according to the law of the intelligible world," ^ or, to put it in another way, " the causality of a being in so far as he belongs to the intelligible world; "^ but he did not believe in the free causality of a phenomenal being; in the world of phenomena he saw nothing but determinism. In the sensible sphere, which alone is of interest to positivists and phenomenists as the only one that we can know, Kant was content with respect for the law of duty as the sole motive which must determine virtuous actions. He then gives us the example of a moralist who, outside the metaphysical considerations by which he is otherwise attracted, is content with a determinism in which he brings in on good grounds as the principle of determination, the tendency to act according to reason. The affirmation of noumenal liberty neither hinders nor aids any one. In no way does it hinder those who have rejected the belief in the noumenon, those who consider the substance of the metaphysician as an accursed idol; it in no way assists those who believe in the existence behind phenomena of a "thing in itself,'' of which we can know nothing, and which can only intervene in the positive order by taking a sensible form. The hypothesis of noumenal liberty is only definitely used in Kant's doctrine to affirm the existence of a character which is proper to each phenomenal being. The being in himself having freely decided to take this or that character, the ^ Critique of Practical Reason, ^ Ibid, 6 82 LIBERTY AND MORALITY. sensible man has the corresponding character. To us who know how many different factors concur in the formation of our character, the Kantian hypo- thesis is hardly anything but a confession of psycho- logical and sociological ignorance: the philosopher of Koenigsberg himself, ignoring the laws of in- dividual and social heredity, and of solidarity in time and space, thought he was laying down the really primal term when he chose the individual character. 44. The Origin of Character. Can it be said that this was a total mistake ? We do not know the factors of our principal tendencies and principal habits; but will not one point always remain in obscurity — the radical origin of our ego ? At what moment do we begin a distinct existence ? If we admit that the first moment is the dividing up, the bipartition, for instance, of a cell till then single, from that moment the being has its own peculiar orientation, which differs very little it may be from the orientation of the neighbouring cell; it manifests attractions and repulsions which are not those of the relatively simple beings which surround it. It has already its own character, which will exer- cise an influence on its own evolution, which is already the " directing idea of the organism " of which Claude Bernard speaks. External stimuli will no doubt provoke reactions which, as they become habitual, will give rise to tendencies, or at least to acquired appetitions and repulsions, which will combine with each other and with fresh appetitions and primitive repulsions to constitute a more and more complex character; but every reaction of a given subject is a THE ORIGIN OF CHARACTER. 83 function of that subject, and bears the mark of the peculiar nature of that subject; so that to discover the external causes of such and such a character does not dispense with the necessity of discovering the matter on which these causes are exercised. It is this primal matter which may be considered as a radical irreducible fact. For to say that an or- ganised being has had as its origin the bipartition of a cell does not yet suffice as the full reason of its appearance in nature. Was the mother-cell a simple unity? Did it not comprise under its envelope different elements or groups of elements already orientated in a different manner? And who can ever tell us the origin of the natural elements? If we got so far as to show how nature forms with inorganic elements the simplest organic compounds, if we were to discover in physico-chemical combina- tions the principle of life, of biological and psycho- logical organisations, we could then claim to give a reason for the characteristic appetition of this or that embryo, from the number and the disposition of its molecules and atoms; and we could then go back to the source of the radical diversity of characters. But the distinction between the organic and the in- organic ever tends to be effaced, not so much by the reduction of properties vital to the mechanism, as by the identification of chemical affinities with vital properties; the domain of life seems to be as wide as the domain of nature. " Life," says Claude Ber- nard,^ "is creation. . . . The organising synthesis remains internal and silent. . . . Vital destruction is only comparable to a large number of physico- chemical affinities of decomposition and subdivision." ^ Le^'ons sur ies phinomlnes de la vie, pp. 39, 40. 84 LIBERTY AND MORALITY. Would not therefore the hypothesis be too bold were we to assume the reduction of living organism to even a considerable number of physico-chemical pheno- mena, such at least as those we are familiar with ? 45. Science, Conscience, and Liberty. The first principle of each individual character therefore remains mysterious. Is that a sufficient reason for supposing it is an act of liberty? The imagination of the metaphysicians could rigorously lead up to the conception of a soul penetrating the mother-cell, we know not how, to determine its bio- logical development in a determinate direction; but such a supposition without a basis would be value- less and unworthy of belief. However, a mind, an already complex consciousness, only appears to us susceptible of free will, if we understand by liberty not the simple power of deviation,^ which Epicurus recognised in atoms, but the power of choosing after deliberation, and of making a choice dictated by reason. The affirmation of free will is therefore rather in conflict than in harmony with the data of science. Our ignorance of the first commencement of every individual existence leaves no room for the supposi- tion of a kind of primitive "clinamen," a blind determination, without reason or moral value. It is true that certain contemporary thinkers have seemed to give to liberty, and therefore to the dignity of the free being, a place apart among psychological facts, by asserting liberty to be "an immediate ^ Lucretius, ii. 292. — Tr* SCIENCE, CONSCIENCE, AND LIBERTY. 85 datum of the consciousness."^ They have thus revived and remarkably strengthened the old spiritual- istic thesis of liberty affirmed by the witness of that inner sense, to which, unfortunately, we cannot attach much importance, for it hides from us most psychic facts, and only lets us see most other facts confusedly, whatever progress introspection may have made. They have carried analysis as far as possible, in order to destroy the illusion that the first observation of ourselves creates, by making us con- ceive of our states of consciousness as juxtaposed, and of the elements of these states as independent of one another, acting one on the other just like weights, or any other mechanical forces. The thesis of determinism has thus been refuted by a searching study of ourselves. You have only to know yourself well, they tell us, to see your liberty. Nothing could prove it more clearly than the affirmation of a philo- sophical conscience, of a critical spirit which has reached a very high degree in the power of analysis, discovering in the continuity of its ego and of its psychical future an obstacle impassable by all determinism. But the datum of the consciousness is a simple negation. Let us admit that we have proved that the determinism of psychic facts, such as they are usually conceived, does not exist. It is not estab- hshed, inasmuch as each being from his birth to his death is endowed with an autonomy such that his liberty is inviolable and his moral dignity incom- parable to any other known value. Once more in this interminable dispute between the partisans and * Of. Les donnies immediates de la conscience, a thesis by M. Bergsen, an eminent professor at the College de France. Alcan, 1889. 86 LIBERTY AND MORALITY. the adversaries of liberty, the partisans have shown the futility of certain arguments brought forward by their adversaries ; but the discussion is far from being closed, and it would be childish to proclaim metaphysic liberty as an indisputable and funda- mental fact. 46. Belief and Liberty. " It is clear," says M. Renouvier, speaking of the thesis of real liberty, " that I ought only to seek for its acceptation by belief and by free belief. I notice that the postulate (of liberty) arising out of and not preceding morality, is essentially concerned with other doctrines than pure morality. . . This postulate is not demanded for the existence of morality, . . What is indispensable to morality is not a postulate, it is a fact, the fact of liberty that is apparent and practically believed, and from which no one can escape who deliberates and resolves on an act, comparing dif- ferent possibilities in relation to the good, possibilities equally practicable according to his practical judg- ment, none of which is presented to him beforehand as obligatory." M. Fouill6e goes farther in the same direction. He is content with the illusion of liberty. He believes that although real liberty may fail us, the idee-force of liberty, however little may be its objective value, will render us the greatest services from the moral point of view. ^ An idea-force is the surplus force added to an idea by the factor of its reflection in consciousness. Cf. Fouillee, V Evoiutionistne des Idies-Forcesy Intro, iv., *' Importance de la question des Id^es-Forces en Morale," pp. Ixvii-xciv. — Tr. BELIEF AND LIBERTY. 87 Thus the question is set in fresh terms. Is the idea of liberty necessary to moral action ? This idea cannot be that of an indifferent liberty, leaving to the will (a mysterious entity) the right of pronouncing arbitrarily, and, if necessary, in conflict with the conclusions of reason, with pure indifference to all ends and feelings.^ Such a liberty would only be favourable to absurdity; for the char- acteristic of good sense and judgment is that it gives the reasons of things, facts, and acts. The free man par excellence would be the man who could give the reason of none of his voluntary determinations, who would never know why he acts, and who, like certain insane people, persecuted or impulsive, would only feel the effects of a force which'urges him, leads him, and decides in him and for him, without his really taking any part in the decision. If men had ever for the most part the conviction that they were them- selves the possessors of a faculty freed from all rational control, making all deliberation and all reasoning useless, would not the result be horrible, and should we not see a kind of fatalism arise, based on the belief in a Fatum immanent in the individual, replacing the "destiny" of days gone by, which at any rate demanded a universe and took the place of cosmic law ? The idea of liberty therefore should be reconciled with the idea of determinism ; but then, it may be * ** Motifs et mobiles." The motifs are ideas influencing the volition — are intellectual. Thus a motif \% initiation of action by ideas or ends in view. The mobiles are sentiments, passions, etc., influencing the volition — /.^., are emotional. Thus a mobile is initiation of action by feeling. It will be seen that it is difficult to find simple words which will adequately express the meaning of motifs and mobiles, — Tr. 88 LIBERTY AND MORALITY. that of a determination by oneself opposed to that of a determination by a power outside oneself, of an internal opposed to an external causality. The idea of a free man is that of an agent who is really an agent instead of being simply an intermediary for the transmission of movements. A billiard ball is not considered free because it receives the external impulse which in its turn it transmits; but some ordinary minds consider that animals are free (the surest indication of this belief is that, as a rule, they impute to animals misconduct, and strike them and ill-treat them as if they were responsible beings capable of improvement), because an animal appears as a veritable point of departure of move- ment, as a prime motor, capable of giving rise, to use M. Renouvier's expression, to a really first beginning. Those thinkers who refuse liberty to the animal grant it spontaneity, and reserve the name of liberty for the reasonable spontaneity of man. But to them a mysterious power of initiative remains the essential thing in their conception of free will. Now psycho- logy, by revealing, as I think I have shown above, the mechanism of deliberation and choice; the subordination of attention, the most important phe- nomenon of all in voluntary choice, to the sensible appearance of different and more and more powerful tendencies; the formation of tendencies and their close independence with respect to the environment, to heredity, and to physico-chemical and biological phenomena; will not psychology, I say, faithful to the scientific spirit, crush the belief in this power of initiative, in this idea of liberty, and crush it the more easily the more illusory it is ? THE PERSON, THE REAL AGENT. 89 It may be objected that the conscience will always protest against scientific affirmation, and \^ill hold by the apparent fact of liberty. That is as if we were to say that the conscience will always protest against such a scientific assertion as that the earth moves round the sun, because the sensible fact is the rotation of the sun round the earth. The most ignorant man in the civilised nations of our time knows perfectly well that it is the earth that turns, and if he had in some action to take account of the relations of the earth and the sun, he would rather trust the scientific assertion than the sensible datum^ We have seen that although science has not yet succeeded in proving the absolute determinism of the facts of consciousness, it hardly leaves any place for an original contingency. Let us then be frank enough to say, to teach, and to prove, that liberty, as it is too often conceived, is an illusion due, as Spinoza foresaw, to ignorance of most of the deter- mining causes of our decisions. We do not believe in the virtue of illusorj' ideas ; the power of an illusion can in every case be only of short duration ; we cannot base morality on, or to say the least support it by, a so-called fact which has only to be applied to secure its disappearance, in a great measure at least, because it includes so large a share of error. 47. The Person, the Real Agent, Moreover, truth will not have the disastrous con- sequences that are imagined. Determinism, properly understood, does not compel us to see in the moral agent a simple instrument, or a simple means of go LIBERTY AND MORALITY. transition for an impulse which has come from else- where. Every organised being has its form, which is irreducible to another form, and which has at least as much importance as its substance. Individual properties appear with the appearance of life, and so do action and reaction according to the nature peculiar to each individual. We must also avoid an error that is common enough, although it is frequently pointed out : that which is committed whenever we consider the effect as contained in the cause. To positive science as well as to the phenomenist philosophy, cause is only the antecedent which by its presence or by its relative position determines in a subject certain conse- quences, impels a subject which is capable of action to certain well-determined actions, — actions which cannot fail to be identically reproduced under the same circumstances. Now, when it is a question of a living being which is continually changing, the effect on it of a constant cause is also changing, and in the proportion in which the total change affects the relation origin- ally existing between the cause and the part or function of the subject specially interested. We see, therefore, that in a living being the same causes run a considerable risk of not producing the same effects at different times. A remedy taken now cannot have exactly the same effect as if it had been taken some week ago ; a fortiori, the same object may very well fail to produce on me to-morrow the same explosion of anger which it determines to-day. I am the imme- diate cause, in the scientific and philosophical sense of the word, of this change of causal relation ; this is because my ego is changing, and it is because it THE PERSON, THE REAL AGENT. QI is following out its own peculiar evolution that the effect will not be produced. The living being, especially the reasonable being who reflects, and whose reflection still more compli- cates the psychical processes by introducing into them a wider share of personal influences, rightly therefore considers himself as an agent, as a cause endowed with a peculiar efficacy; he rightly says that he is not determined to act as he does only by what is external, that he is not compelled by external forces; that he is a bundle, a system of relatively independent forces. He claims that he is competent to choose between possibilities the field of which is circumscribed by external necessities; and in fact, a certain number of actions remain possible until the moment when deliberation, attaining its " term," makes one of them necessary. No doubt the factors of this deliberation are sentiments and tendencies; but they are his sentiments and his tendencies; they are he in short, for he is nothing more than his psychic states. Differences of opinion on liberty spring in most cases from the vicious conception of the ego, which is supposed to be something outside the ends and feelings which then seem to determine it. But these tendencies, these representations linked by reason- ings, which are the ends and motives ^ of our actions, these are we, our ego, progressively determining itself. To sum up, although the evolution of the acting agent, the ego, is, if not altogether, at least in a great measure, determined by external causes, yet the ego is the immediate cause of its voluntary decisions by the ^ Vide footnote, p. 87. 92 LIBERTY AND MORALITY. personal and original future which is quite its own, and quite irreducible to any other phenomena of nature. It is therefore the origin of a new causal series ; if we cannot give from other sources the why of its nature, at least we can give the why of its acts. This has been done rather than that because I was the agent and no one else. Could I prevent myself from doing that ? The question is the same as if I were asked if I could not be what I was, or become other than I was. But I needed an anterior or present motive to be other than I am, a cause of modification in my future. If it is not found in me, if it did not depend on me at the instant of its birth, if it could not depend on me until the external aroused it in my mind, I have been what I could be and that differs from what I might be now. I could not therefore say why my deliberation is not further prolonged ; the fact is that it has been checked at a certain point, because I have not pursued my researches farther, or in another direction. 48. Conclusion. Ethics must, therefore, be content with regarding the being as a real moral agent, and must, therefore, set itself to procure for men at the moment they are about to take a decision, as many ends and feelings as possible, so as to make deliberation as enlightened as possible. There are social means of reinforcing useful stimuli, of diminishing the influence that harmful stimuli have upon a mind of attracting or dis- tracting the attention; there is an individual and collective discipline which constitutes the moral education of the child and of the adult, and which issues in deliberations which are more and more CONCLUSION. 93 fruitful in happy choice. To prepare, from the tenderest childhood, the ego to intervene as representing reason in the breast of nature, is to prepare man for freedom with respect to the individual passions, for obedience to a common law, and for a rational rule of conduct ; and moral liberty consists in such a freedom and in such an obedience. The being which would have been only able to obey its passions is thus led to obey the rational law. Its cause is found in the nature of the man who allows, as we have seen, a tendency to act in a systematic manner, to think according to reason,^ and to give a reason for acts in their conformity to a law. This tendency may be weak or strong, its influence may be slight or sovereign. The desire to strengthen it has always been the intelligible choice of a certain number of individuals, of moralists; and they are the cause, by the action they have exercised on their fellows, of its power in humanity, of the place that is made for it in education, and therefore of the r6le it plays in the intelligible choice made by moral beings^ (although each of these beings may be the real cause of his choice). And therefore morality, far from being useless, if the idea of liberty does not exist as most moralists and philosophers have con- ceived it, becomes, on the contrary, more and more useful in proportion as men take more and more account of the determinism of their actions, and of ^ Thus moral liberty appears as of psycho-sociological origin^ an aspect under which it has never yet been presented. The nearest approach to such a conception would be the idee-force of M. Fouillee ; but it must not be forgotten that it is definitively but the illusion of liberty, as long as the social evolution which we here indicate id real, and has a cause in the psychological nature of man. 94 THE MORAL TENDENCIES. the necessity of each becoming an **ego" more complex, more rich in tendencies, and, in particular, more led to act rationally. The moral agent only appears to us at his best when under the dominion of its characteristic tendencies. These are, therefore, the tendencies which we must study, co-ordinate, and arrange in a hierarchy, in order to make a synthetic unity of the moral ego. III. The Moral Tendencies. 49. Different Tendencies, Different Doctrines. As we have already seen, the problem which we have to solve is this : — What is the tendency or system of tendencies which is the best fitted to characterise a reasonable being, determined to action by a moral will ? There are scarcely any tendencies which have not in turn been adopted by moralists as capable of giving rise to good conduct; the grossest and the most refined pleasures, those of the senses as well as of the aesthetic taste and of the " intellect," have been recommended to virtuous man; the egoistic tendencies as well as the altruistic, the tendency to inaction as well as the tendency to effort, have been equally extolled. In general, an incomplete view of the exigencies of human nature, and ignorance or contempt for some of the normal tendencies of man, have been the cause of the adoption of moral theories which are unsatisfactory when we consider their remoteness from psycho-sociological reality. NATURALISM. 95 50. Naturalism, Because to live according to nature seems normal to most men, some writers, for instance, after an imperfect enumeration of the various forms of life according to nature, impose on man as directing tendencies of conduct the same tendencies which determine the course of animal existence. Epicurus and Spencer agree in asserting that the search for pleasure being common to all natural beings, this search must be the motive of human actions.* Admitting that the desire of enjoyment is the predominant desire in most men, it would not necessarily follow that it remains the predominant desire of all reasonable beings, and a fortiori^ if it is merely ascertained that it is a general appetition in the animal series. No doubt we cannot form a great gulf between the human and other living species ; we can believe in the continuity of universal evolution, and in particular of animal evolution, and we ought to admit it more and more as a scientific fact. We therefore are free from the prejudice which makes certain moralists say that it is exactly because such and such a mode of action is animal, that man ought to regard it as unworthy of him, and rather adopt the contrary mode of action; such a prejudice is too obviously the mark of the metaphysical mind which imagines the distinction and opposition between matter, "flesh," and "spirit." * Vide Spencer, TAe Data of Ethics^ chap. iii. p. 46 (1879): "Pleasure somewhere, at some time, to some being or beings, is an inexpugnable element of the conception. It is as much a necessary form of moral intuition as space is a necessary form of intellectual intuition."— Tr. 96 THE MORAL TENDENCIES. But, to refuse to see in man any new tendency superior to those experienced by animals, is also the denial of a scientific fact — viz., the progressive perfection of the animal species. The same difficulty which makes it so hard for psychologists to agree on the nature of rational mental activity, easily leads moralists to exaggerate two contrary tendencies, the tendency to assimilate completely human to animal conduct, and the tendency to draw a profound distinction between them. So that the general solution, which, without disposing of the particular questions, makes them more easily approached, should be the same. Human reason does not differ fundamentally from . animal intelligence; it is only a perfected form of it. While the animal associates images, man in his judgments takes consciousness of his power of association, and affirms the objective value (attributed spontaneously by the animal to its representative synthesis, itself spontaneous) of the reflective synthesis he effects. While the animal is content with practical inferences which make him avoid a stick like that with which he has been beaten and a fire like the fire which has burned him, man, by reflection on his mental operations, analyses them, distinguishes between their different stages in order to place them side by side after having separated them and reasoned on them. While the animal is capable of classing objects from the point of view of their utility or its own particular likings, man classes them according to the most general and most dis- interested tendencies from the universal point of view. He thus reaches the idea of necessity and law, and then, thanks to science, he moves by rapid NATURALISM. 97 steps from the lower stage, which was his point of departure, and which remains the last term of the mental evolution of animals.^ It is, therefore, reflection, the higher degree of attention paid by a being to himself, which constitutes, from the speculative point of view, the superiority of man. This superiority involves a greater elevation of sentiment, the appearance of aesthetic, religious, intellectual, and social tendencies, of which only the veriest rudiments are to be seen in the mind of beasts. But just as the human use of reason is a con- tinuation of animal intelligence, and constitutes an efflorescence of nature from the intellectual point of view, so the disinterested, aesthetic, religious sentiments, etc., which are the glory of humanity, are not external to nature, are not in opposition to the appetites and tendencies of animals, but rather constitute their legitimate end. Pleasure results from the gratification of a tend- ency, on condition that the lack of gratification of other tendencies does not involve keener dis- comfort. The animal experiences pleasure in satisfy- ing his instinctive activity without a check; as we have seen, it has an appetite, or a small number of predominant appetites, which constitute the ordinary source of its pleasures and pains. In man this is far from being the case; instinctive activity is almost evanescent; the instinct of preservation and the sexual instinct have lost most of their blind and automatic although well-defined characters of activity; and the most diverse tendencies may acquire preponderance according to the individual, ^ Cf. Romanes, Mental Evolution in Animals and Mental Evolution in Man, 7 98 THE MORAL TENDENCIES. the temperament, and the environment. Thus we see in certain men the most delicate sensibility destroyed, or at any rate lessened, by the grossest pleasures, and even this refined sensibility becomes the lot of the few. Some find their greatest pleasure in the exercise of power, in the wielding of authority, and others in a state of tranquillity which is not untainted by servility; others in self-renunciation, charity, love; and others, again, in perpetual amuse- ment. When it is claimed that a man ought to seek his pleasures like the animal, we forget the differ- ence that a higher degree of evolution has effected between the two modes of activity — animal pursuit and human conduct. 51. Hedonism} The precept, "Seek your pleasures," may be used in a twofold sense. The first, " Seek each the pleasure that gives you the activity most in conformity with your predominant tendency," furnishes us with a precept of moral anomia, of social anarchy, and brings us directly to a type of conduct very different to that of the brute; for the brute at least subordinates his different interests to the vital interest safeguarded by his instinct; while the man who does not conceive a hierarchy of pleasures, a scale of values, and a scale of interests, is capable of subordinating his vital interests to harmful pleasures. * On this section the following may be read with advantage ^ — Lecky, History of European Morals (1890), vol. i. chap. i. ; Bain, Mental and Moral Science^ Book IV. , chap. iv. ; The Emotions and the Will, chap, viii., "The Will"; Mackenzie, Manual of Ethics^ chap, vi.; Sorley, Ethics of Naturalism ^ chap. vii. HEDONISM. 99 But if we give to the precept the second mean- ing that it may have, " Seek the pleasure that is most in conformity with human nature," from that moment we formulate a command which requires numerous commentaries, which can only be carried out at the cost of considerable reflection, which implies lofty ideas, and in the front rank of those ideas, the idea of duty. For to command a man to seek that mode^of activity which pleases him best, is scarcely to command, in the proper sense of the word. At most it is to approve of his giving himself up to moral anarchy, to encourage him to persevere in a method of con- duct which it is far too easy for him to adopt. But to command him to seek the pleasure which is most in conformity with human nature, is to oppose to the choice to which his individual character would have led him, the choice that every reasonable being ought to make in order to experience a pleasure which every man should endeavour to experience in order to be a man in the fullest sense of the word. And what in the opinion of the various moralists is this pleasure? Have they thoroughly analysed human nature ? have they not neglected one of the important indications of psychology and sociology by calling pleasure supreme ? That is the question which we must now ask ourselves. It is true that we cannot a priori refuse to pleasure a place in ethics. Pleasure is one of the most important psychical phenomena; and a morality which does not take pleasure into account is purely theoretical and use- less; as we have seen, concrete beings are not moved by abstract ideas, but by the arousing of tendencies, and every tendency issues in either pleasure or 100 THE MORAL TENDENCIES. pain. Now pain determines movements of repulsion or aversion; pleasure determines movements of attraction, appetitions which keep alive the primi- tive tendency and develop it instead of destroying it. For a precept to act on man, not only must it correspond to a tendency, but this tendency must also be strong enough to procure pleasure, a pleasure as far as possible without pain, which demands no too painful a sacrifice, or which procures an intense pleasure by virtue of the sacrifice.^ But the tendency to experience pleasure and to avoid pain is not the first of all, either in the psycho- genetic order, or in the order of relative importance. In fact the tendency manifested by the new-born child, which is met hardly anywhere else but in the lower stages of idiocy,^ and which subsists to the last in the insane, is the tendency to eat whatever comes within reach (even things that are disgusting, as do idiots and certain classes of the insane, without appearing to experience either pleasure or pain, except perhaps at the moment when the stomach is replete).^ This instinct is the first specific phase of the instinct of preservation, an instinct which later arouses tendencies of appetition or repulsion when agreeable and painful emotions are sufficiently differentiated and have become the signs either of the useful or the good, or of the harmful or the bad. Besides, the tendency to seek pleasure enters into conflict at a later stage with the instinct of preserva- 1 Cf. J. S. Mill, Utilitarianism (1891), p. 23.— Tr. 2 We do not say in the "lowest" stage, because certain idiots have not even the instinct of preservation under the form of the instinct of nutrition. 8 Cf. Mercier, Sanity and Insanity^ pp. 287 et seq,\ Ribot, The Psychology of the Emotions^ pp. 200 et se(j. ^Tk. EPICUREANISM. 101 tion with which at first it is intimately allied. This is because the agreeable emotions are associated with numerous modes of activity, more or less remote from the modes adapted simply to the preservation of existence, and because from the tendency to pre- servation inevitably springs the tendency to develop- ment, which gives rise to innovations, some useful and some harmful ; and it is found that certain harm- ful innovations have, nevertheless, been agreeable, because pleasure is not a sign invented by nature to warn man of what constitutes his good; because pleasure is the psychical result of biological modi- fications, multiple reflexes, and other organic phe- nomena that may be determined by a poison as well as by a healthy beverage, and by morbid as well as by moral activity. 52. Epicureanism} Epicurus seems to have understood this, for he has divided desires into three classes — (i) Natural and necessary desires; (2) desires which are only natural; and (3) desires neither natural nor neces- sary — and only conceded the satisfaction of natural and necessary desires, and therefore of those which are the strongest and most capable of procuring pleasure without too keen an accompanying dis- comfort. But is his enumeration of the natural and necessary desires complete ? It has been said that the morality of this philo- sopher issues in the morality of "dry bread." It is, in fact, essentially negative. Ever>' pleasure * Diog. Laert., x. 149. Cf. Guyau, La Morale tT &picure^ chap, iv., PP 45-57.— Tr. 102 THE MORAL TENDENCIES. resulting from action must be avoided as uncertain, unstable, and likely to produce in the future more pain than pleasure. The wise man must, therefore, content himself with the restful pleasure which con- sists in a natural tendency to satisfy his most press- ing needs, those of food: "He who lives on dry bread and water need envy Jupiter in nothing."^ Throughout the doctrine of Epicurus there are certain signs of a positive conception of human happiness. First, there is the distinction between corporeal pleasures, which are momentary, and the pleasures of the mind, which are accumulative, and perpetuated by foresight and memory.^ No doubt the pleasure of the soul consists in prevision and recollection of the apathy induced by the gratifica- tion of the natural and necessary desires of the body; but it would be remarkable if a Greek, seeing to how large a degree his tendencies were speculative, had not conceived beyond the corporeal apathy a mental ataraxia''* permitting some of the pleasures of the intellect. We find an explicit trace of this concep- tion in the Epicurean theology, in which we see the gods who are only superior men placed in the " inter- worlds" there to live happily, needing neither sleep nor food, because they taste the charms of conversation and of the loftiest intellectual life. For they are beau- tiful and reasonable; they enjoy that intellect which, as Epicurus himself asserts, is the greatest good.* Whatever view we may take on this particular point, there is no doubt that the Epicurean con- ^ Cf. Diog. Laert., xi. pp. 130-46. 2 op, cit,, p. 137. ^ Ribot, The Psychology of the Emotions^ p. 360. — Tr. * Op, cit,, p. 131. UTILITARIANISM. I03 ception of supreme pleasure is incomplete, and in- adequate to the requirements of human nature. Even admitting that Epicurus has prescribed the search for pleasure which results in the free exercise of the intellect, we must not forget that he has formally banished the pleasures of social and family life, and ipso facto all the gratification which may result from disinterested intercourse with other men, with art, and with politics. He has impaired human existence, deprived it of most of its attractions, and has reduced to a minimum its requirements. Instead of trying to subordinate the different desires to one another, he has suppressed nearly all of them, only retaining that without which the most restricted human life would be almost inconceivable — the desire of satisfying hunger. He has not even endeavoured to give to the sexual instinct, powerful as it is, and prompt as it is in its vengeance on those who abuse it, the satisfaction that is its due. To sum up, the morality of Epicurus is the apotheosis of idleness, of that moral inertia which tends to realise an unnatural physical inertia. To criticise it from the psychological point of view, it appears to be the result of a huge blunder, or at least of a pathological conception of human nature. Asceticism alone has gone further in this direction than Epicureanism. 53. Utilitarianism. The practical mind of the English philosophers has led them to reject the ascetic^ and to retain the utilitarian principle of Epicurus. They did not wish 3 Bentham, Theory of Legislation^ chap. ii. — Tr. 104 THE MORAL TENDENCIES. to deprive themselves of the varied pleasures of human life, but they endeavoured to choose the pleasures which would bring to them after a longer or shorter interval happiness of the most lasting and most durable character. This was the reason of the "arithmetic of pleasure," heralded by Bentham,^ careful, like his compatriot Priestley, of "the greatest happiness of the greatest number." Although they dwelt but little on human solidarity, the fact of a profound community of interests was none the less accepted at the end of the eighteenth century, and even at that time there was no endeavour to separate indi- vidual from collective well-being. Besides, sympathy appeared, if not to all as a factor of morality, at least in general as a natural phenomenon which must be taken into account; brutal egoism seemed clumsy even to individuals who saw in the sacrifice of certain petty private satisfactions to the common benefit a skilful operation destined to procure for the agent many more advantages than those he sacrifices. Morality therefore became an affair of calculation and intelligent choice of the acts most suited to safeguard private and collective interests, as inti- mately connected as possible. What reproach could be laid to the charge of a morality which took into account all human interests, from economic interests to aesthetic, and which endeavoured to induce men to adopt every mode of activity which would lead to the most complete satisfaction of our tendencies both as individuals and as social beings? Could ^ "On Bentham and Epicurus," vide Guyau, La Morale Anglaise Contemporainey chap, i., p. 13. — Tr. INTEREST AND DESIRE. I05 it be reproached with not proving the necessity of the conduct it commended ? It would answer tri- umphantly, though indirectly, by pointing to the number of attractions which it presented to the sensible being, the power that is conferred upon it by the promises of happiness that it could make and fulfil; by affirming that there is no moral law in the sense of the word law in general — that is to say, so far as its necessary and inevitable relation is concerned; that there are moral precepts the value, and a fortiori the necessity, of which can always be contested; but that in the hierarchy of moral precepts the highest place is occupied by the most efficacious. And not one of them would be more efficacious than that which would correspond to every human tendency, which would clash with none, and which could, if followed up, give com- plete happiness or at least the greatest happiness possible. We cannot, therefore, discredit a moral theory which would satisfy all interests and prescribe what is useful to them as a full safeguard. But it should be preceded by another theory, having as its object the reduction of the diversity of human interests to the unity of a system, for we know by experience that they can never be reconciled as long as they are in isolation. 54. Interest and Desire. If you separate interest from desire, you may no doubt assert that my interest, properly understood, is identical with yours. But from my point of view your claim cannot be allowed, for my interest is I06 THE MORAL TENDENCIES. what is good for me, and that alone appears to me good which is in conformity with my desire. Modify my desires, change my tendencies, and prove to me that they are bad. If you succeed in convincing me, and if we go so far as to have the same or recon- cilable desires, we shall have the same interests, or interests which are either complementary or in harmony. But to modify my tendencies being pre- cisely the immediate object of morality, you will be arguing in a vicious circle if you claim to base your moral theory on the postulate of the funda- mental harmony of interests, or of their natural subordination. So far as the reasonable will, in harmony with science, does not intervene to establish in the most objective possible manner a scale of values, a hier- archy of ends, such that an end becomes a mean for a higher end, useful in its turn for the realisation of a still higher end; so far as one is not brought in consequence to the highest psychological and sociological considerations, the utilitarian formulae remain with no wider scope than that of a general precept which meets with too little opposition to remain the sole precept of morality. "Do what is useful for the realisation of the good" is to say "He who wants the ends wants the means," and that is saying nothing at all. 55. Egoism. In fact, the utilitarian doctrine only takes a par- ticular aspect when it i3 opposed to the morality of disinterestedness, of generosity, and of the love of EGOISM, 107 others, and becomes clearly the morality of an indi- vidual or collective egoism.^ The utilitarian, in the true sense of the word, does nothing from aesthetic or intellectual interest, nothing from devotion to an ideal out of which he does not know whether or not he can extract some advantage or pleasure. The type of the utilitarian is the busi- ness man, the Englishman on whose lips is always the famous word "business," and who in matters of love, or religion, or aesthetics, never forgets his business. It is not long before such a man is inconsequent with himself, just as the miser who from the preliminary search for gold as a means of procuring for himself pleasure or happiness, is not long before he takes the means for the end, and the possession of gold as the principal object of his activity. John Stuart Mill has admirably shown how, as an effect of the associa- tion of ideas, the means so closely associate them- selves with the end that they become the unique term close behind which the term that is passed disappears in the distance.^ (In this way also is explained man's search for virtue and moral value.) The horizon of the utilitarian then becomes more ^ ** I think," says M. Renouvier {Science de la Morale^ vol. i. p. 194), ** that there is no abuse of ordinary language in using the word interest to indicate the group of human ends which comprises three forms of good or elements of happiness: (i) those which directly concern the observation of the individual ; (2) those which concern his powers of the material or impulsive order when his passions have only himself as their end ; (3) his means or his accumulative power of preserva- tion and enjoyment. . . . Utility like interest has a collective direction, but does not cease to be applied to the individual and his material good in the final analysis." 2 Mill's Utilitarianism^ 1891, pp. 54 et seq, ; Sorley, Ethics of Naturalism^ pp. 134 et seq. — Tr. I08 THE MORAL TENDENCIES. and more restricted. First of all desirous to procure for himself the means that are useful to the loftiest satisfactions, whether of an intellectual, aesthetic, or social order, he little by little comes to search for the means that are useful to the satisfaction of appetites which are common to man and to the animal. In vain was John Stuart Mill's famous declara- tion:^ "I would rather be a discontented Socrates than a satisfied pig ; " most of his disciples were not long before they considered Socrates as a dreamer, a Utopian, a man who did not know how to conduct his business, and preferred to that unfortunate sage the happy merchant who, without . any elevation of mind or heart, succeeds in his enterprises, enriches himself, and assures for himself an existence of gaiety and good living. Such utilitarians give us an excellent instance of the theoretical insufficiency of utilitarianism; they show the practical powerlessness of a doctrine, definitively directed, but incapable of being rigor- ously systematic. The formula, " the greatest happiness of the greatest number," will be an empty formula as long as the happiness that is sought for is not better defined. The worst of tyrants will pretend that he is causing the happiness of the greatest number of his subjects by putting to death, exiling, or imprisoning all those who do not think as he does. The most anarchist of theorists may on his side claim to make people happy by allowing each to act according to his own sweet will. ^ ** It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied ; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied." Utilitarianism, p. 14.— Tr. THE COLLECTIVE INTEREST. I09 56. The Collective Interest. The sacrifice of individual to collective interest can only be prescribed when the collective interest is well defined. Now, collective interest is either, as some of the best thinkers conceive it, in conflict with the opinions of the masses, or in conformity with the aspirations of the greatest number. In the first case we may be well assured that the masses will be ignorant of those interests that some assert are veritably theirs, and these worthy souls will sacrifice themselves to no purpose without finding any other satisfaction than that of duty accomplished — viz., the satisfaction of the conscience. In the second case they will give way to the impulse of the masses and the pressure of the mob, rather than act morally. They will resign themselves " to a large number of practices which will not be less obligatory than others, without, however, its being possible to see what services they are rendering to the com- munity."^ " For collective utility to be the principle of moral action, it must be in niost cases the object of a fairly clear representation before it can determine the con- duct. Now utilitarian calculations, even if exact, are combinations of ideas which are too subtle to act much on the will, . . . since the interest is not immediate and perceptible, it is too feebly conceived to give an impulse to activity."^ " And further, nothing is so obscure as these questions of utility. However slight may be the ^ Durkheim, Division du Travail social ^ p. 12. 2 We must not forget, in fact, that interest from the psychological point of view is inseparable from tendency, and that the keenest tend- ency accompanies the clearest and most concrete representations. no THE MORAL TENDENCIES. complexity of the situation, the individual no longer sees clearly where his own interest lies. . . . But the evidence is still more difficult to obtain when it is the interest, not of an individual, but of a society, which is at stake. . . . And even if we were to examine the rules, the social utility of which is most amply demonstrated, we see that the services which they render cannot be known in advance."^ So that not only have the commandments of morality never, as a matter of fact, had " as their end the interest of society," but it is impossible to effectively command a man to take as his end the safeguard of real collective interests, when he is incapable of safeguarding and of recognising his real personal interests. And if instead of real interests we simply speak of the ends in which an individual is interested because of his tendencies, there is no doubt that a being without moral culture, and without a preliminary idea of duty, will spontaneously interest himself more in what corre- sponds to his strongest tendencies — i.e., his nearest and most personal ends. Remote and imperfect ends, such as the well-being of society in a thousand years' time, will leave him indifferent. It is true that it is objected that, as a matter of fact, there is no conflict possible between the search for real individual happiness and that of the happi- ness of the greatest number; so that it is not at all necessary for the individual to deliberately propose to himself collective happiness as his end. " But to speak only of actions done from the motive of duty, and in direct obedience to principle : it is," says J. S. Mill,^ " a misapprehension of the utilitarian mode of * Durkheim, idid,, p. 14. ^ Utilitarianism ^ p. 26.— Tr. THE COLLECTIVE INTEREST. Ill thought, to conceive it as implying that people should fix their minds upon so wide a generality as the world, or society at large; . . . the thoughts of the most virtuous man need not on these occasions travel beyond the particular persons concerned, except so far as is necessary to assure himself that in benefiting them he is not violating the rights — that is, the legitimate and authorised expectations — of any one else. . . . The occasions on which any person (except one in a thousand) has it in his power to do this on an extended scale, in other words to be a public benefactor, are but exceptional: and on these occasions alone is he called on to consider public utility." So that in all other cases, that is to say in almost every case, the utilitarian will think, like the wise Epicurean, of himself, or at most of a small circle of friends. Provided that he abstains " from whatever is manifestly pernicious to society," by being useful to himself he will be working for the common good. But, then, if his happiness consists in this gratifica- tion of the commonest and simplest tendencies, and if only the most foolish things are of interest to him, and if his t5T)e is generalised in society, shall we not reach a mode of social existence from which will be banished, not only every lofty and generous feeling, but even every cordial understanding ? For nothing divides men more than low, common, and inevitably selfish sentiments. Can one prove this harmony of common and indi- vidual utility otherwise than by postulating in the individual great loftiness of thought and relatively dis- interested tendencies, or, at least, interests which are outside the sphere of common individual interests ? 112 THE MORAL TENDENCIES. John Stuart Mill seems to count too much on a moral sense developed and refined among all men. "Those who are equally acquainted with, and equally capable of appreciating and enjoying both [kinds of life], do give a most marked preference to the manner of existence which employs their higher faculties. Few human creatures would consent to be changed into any of the lower animals; ... no per- son of feeling and conscience would be selfish and base."i But these people who are susceptible of healthy appreciation, and these men of feeling, are rare. These are not the men who have most need of • precepts of morality; the elevation of their senti- ments would almost suffice to make them truly virtuous. It is the majority of men who lack such elevation, who are always requiring to be directed, raised, and brought to the conception of an ideal of happiness higher than that which they can imagine by themselves. Their spontaneous search for the useful is therefore of no moral value; their happiness is not a moral happiness. And this is the crowning condemnation of utili- tarianism ; the system is only good for conspicuously moral beings.^ 57. Intellectual Happiness. The primordial interest, personal or collective, seems to be that of self-preservation. But the tendency of the being to persevere in his being, which Spinoza proclaimed to be the very essence of 1 Op. cttf p. 12.— Tr. ^ Cf. Mackenzie, op, cit^ pp. 103, 104. INTELLECTUAL HAPPINESS. II3 all reality, can only issue in immobility and stupor. Combined with the tendency to change, it gives rise to a desire of regular development which may be confounded in many cases with the desire for happiness. What is happiness in fact but the persistence of a desirable state, the prolongation without fatigue of a pleasure, and therefore of quite a particular pleasure, since pleasure in general (according to all psycho- logists, and also for physiological reasons connected with nervous exhaustion and modifications in the composition of the blood) is followed by pain, and transformed more or less promptly into a painful feeling ? ^ The state of happiness does not admit of violent emotions or of too keen an excitement. It is much less compatible with the sensorial stimuli, with mobility of mind and body, than with the in- tellectual and contemplative life, or with moderate activity and the peaceful life. And that is why the tendency to happiness accommodates itself very read- ily with tendencies to the intellectual development and to the exercise of the rational faculties. The latter tendencies, as we have seen, are human, and we must not underrate their importance. By the side of the need of action, which is as animal as it is human, and which is derived directly from the necessity to life of development, is the need of think- ing, reasoning, assigning causes, discovering laws, understanding and explaining, which is properly human, and which raises in certain men a devotion to science, a love of truth, and the intensive culture of every means adapted to give a satisfactory know- ^ For PleasurC'Pain v. Stout, Manual of Psychology^ pp. 276-283. — Tr. 8 114 THE MORAL TENDENCIES. ledge of things and of oneself. But it must not become exclusive. To my mind, Aristotle, after having laid down the principles of an entirely theoretical morality, had the great merit of recognising that this ethic is rather better for gods than it is for men. " It is not qua man but qua something divine residing in him "^ that man is called upon to live the properly intellectual life, and to enjoy the happiness that follows the contempla- tion of the intellectual. " That, no doubt, is beyond . human nature," for man is a composite being, and has a soul composed not only of intellectual functions but also of functions that are nutritive, sensitive, appetitive, and motive. It is none the less true that to Aristotle the moral ideal is precisely that activity of the divinity which experiences no passion and no desire, which has nothing to will, having nothing to desire, which knows nothing of the world, and delights itself in eternal self-contemplation. To propose to man as a distant end, no doubt, but as the supreme object of the desire which moves the whole world (the search for the divine), this purely intellectual perfection, is to prepare the wise man, who has only a practical wisdom and " ethical virtue,'' to have no interest in terrestrial action and to live for pure speculation alone. Aristotle himself added to the acute observation to which we have just referred, a precept that the mystics will interpret wrongly, although in itself it is harmless. " One must not, because one is a man, have, as certain people point out, a taste for human things, and because one is mortal a taste for mortal ^ Nicomachaean Ethics, Book X., chap. vii. p. io.—Tr. MYSTICISM. 115 things, but so far as it is possible we must make ourselves immortal and do all we can to live in accordance with the noblest part of our being." ^ Now to Aristotle to make oneself immortal does not mean to assure for oneself a personal immortality, an immortality of which the Greek philosopher did not seem to have any very clear conception. To him it meant to succeed in living the intellectual life which is the divine and imperishable life. 58. Mysticism. Plotinus and the neo-platonists saw in this passage from their master a confirmation of the stimuli of Plato, according to whom the soul, imprisoned in the body, ^ must ever unceasingly tend to escape and endeavour to break the bonds by which it is connected with it. The mysticism which has as its consequence morbid ecstasy^ is thus the issue of a moral theory which tries to raise men's ideals far above human miseries. To wish to enter into communion with a divinity which has hardly anything human about it, which we conceive as bodiless and almost soulless, since it is nothing but a pure spirit, is not merely to attempt the impossible, but it is to give way to madness. Mysticism can only flourish by the abandonment of manly thoughts, by the renunciation of the exercise of his reason by the reasonable being, for to exercise ^ op. ciL, Book X., chap. vii. p. 12. ^ "Like an oyster in its shell," PhaedruSy 250; the body is an enclosure or prison in which the soul is incarcerated, Crat. 400. — Tr. ^ Cf. Sidgwick, History of Ethics, pp. 105* 108. —Tr. Il6 THE MORAL TENDENCIES. his reason is to judge with his will when he only affirms or denies according to human tendencies. Now human tendencies, unless they are morbid, are not attracted by the unknowable, by the mysterious, incomprehensible being, the very conception of which demands an effort which can only be translated in our language by giving it its full meaning — ex- travagance. The morality of the mystic is that of morbid impulses, hallucinatory visions, and delirious con- ceptions. Such is the fatal result of the disequili- bration of the mental functions when it is a question of giving absolute predominance either to pure in- tellect or to pure love. The mysticism of the present day has sometimes taken one of the varied forms of eroticism.^ Men seek a subtilised form of love which has nothing human about it, and in which there is no " fleshly passion." They only succeed in realising this extra- ordinary sentiment by a distortion of normal love. The latter is at first quite inseparable from the sexual instinct; but there are perversions of the sexual instinct which only allow a few general character- istics of the multiple characters of the corresponding impulse to subsist. In certain cases the primitive love of the individuals of a sex for the individuals of another sex becomes a vague love of humanity, and in other cases, an equally vague love of a divinity that is only partially conceived. To this is due the morbid aspect of the religion of humanity in certain Positivists, and especially in Auguste Comte during the latter part of his life. ^ Havelock Ellis, Psychology of Sex, ii. pp. 267 et seq. ; Ribot, The Psychology of the Emotions, pp. 99, 319.— Tr. THE ETHICS OF SPINOZA. II7 This new religion, endeavouring to replace the moral practice inspired by positive precepts, differs but little from the ethico-religious practices which are based on the love of God: it is still a mysticism, for it claims to develop in man a sentiment which nor- mally can have no place in his heart; the love of Humanity in general differs as much from the love of concrete beings as the love of the unknowable, which meo always conceive under some particular aspect, differs from it. We cannot ask a man to sacrifice his pleasures, and the delights of his present existence, and his tendencies, which are usually directed towards ends not remote or to present objects, to the sole desire of divine happiness or the happiness of a vague Humanity throughout thousands of years; this desire, aroused by confused or abstracted notions, will never have any real efficacy save on morbid minds, inflamed against nature, trying to crush every natural instinct and every really human in- clination, and only taking delight in so precarious an amusement, because of the disequilibration of their condition. 59. The Ethics of Spinoza. A great philosopher has proposed to man a love of God, of reason, and of humanity as a whole, which may be substituted for all the other sentiments, which may destroy them all, and of itself assure happiness. This, I think, adequately characterises Spinoza and his celebrated theory of the "amor Dei intellectualis." His whole ethics tends to show that human passions Il8 THE MORAL TENDENCIES. are due to confused visions, and notably to ignor- ance of the true cause of phenomena. To avoid the slavery of the passions, and to become at the same time active and free, every event must be referred to God, to the unique substance which is the sole cause of it through the inevitable inter-relations of pheno- mena. To see the necessity of what is, to consider oneself and all other beings as a necessary mode of a divine attribute, to win immortality for one's soul by making of it a thought exactly corresponding to the " idea which necessarily expresses the essence of the human body in God," ^ or "an idea which expresses the essence of the human body sub specie cBternitatis 2 — that should be the principal care of the wise. The duty of the disciple of Spinoza, as well as of the follower of Aristotle, is to make himself immortal by avoiding all natural passions. " From the third type of adequate knowledge (intuitive knowledge of things seen under the aspect of eternity) necessarily arises the intel- lectual love of God. For from this kind of know^- ledge results the joy accompanying the conception of God as cause, which, by the fifth definition of the passions, constitutes the love of God, in so far as we conceive it eternal, and that is what I call the intellectual love of God."^ This love is nothing more than the sentiment which accompanies the conception of a universal necessity, accepted, not without resignation, as if it were a question of an odious fatalism, but with pleasure because the reason is satisfied. Is not such a moral philosophy of superhuman grandeur ?* 1 Spinoza, V., Prop, xxiii. 2 /^/^^ gchol. « Ibid,, Coroll. xxxii. * Guyau, La Morale d'' Epicure, *' Mais cet amour, au fond, n'a rien de libre; c*est une necessity," p. 236. — Tr. THE ETHICS OF SPINOZA. IIQ It presents itself, however, in all Spinoza's work as an ethic of great social influence, since the amor Dei intellectualiSy the love of pure reason, appears to us as alone capable of uniting men who are divided by their individual interests and passions.^ Spinoza's politics are a legitimate development of his morality. The degree of morality required for the soul to become immortal is not therefore proposed as an inaccessible ideal; Spinoza believed in the possibility of realising in human nature his conception of the virtuous being. It may be surprising that the thinker who has so skilfully analysed the passions of man, who, no doubt, experienced them with in- tensity, should have attributed to pure love of the universal reason so great a power. But we must never forget that Spinoza is an inflexible logician, absorbed in demonstrations more geometrico, who, when once a principle is laid down, follows it up to its remotest consequences without troubling himself about their agreement with reality. From the tendency of the being to persevere in his being, joined with the belief, which in his opinion is false, that others can favour or oppose this essential tendency — from this he derives all the passions, and from this in the same way he deduces all "actions," all morality, and every fundamental "conatus," joined to the idea that God is the sole and eternal agent. And thus Spinoza does not trouble himself with human nature; he pursues his long series of demonstrations, corollaries, and scholia after having by a stroke of the pen substituted pure reason for the passionate nature of man. And that is why his Ethics is at once so beautiful and so use- ^ Vide above, sect. 41, p. 77. — Tr. 120 THE MORAL TENDENCIES. less; it is one of those noble works which win admirers but not disciples. To require men to renounce their natural senti- ments and to devote themselves either to the dis- interested contemplation of the true, as Plato and Aristotle required, or to the love of God, of Humanity, or of reason, is quite obviously to demand a super- human effort. All the springs of the soul are broken in a state of extreme tension; or rather, there is nothing left but illusion, self-dupery in a sham morality. 60. The Stoic Morality, Nor is normal systematisation best assured by those moral theories which develop to excess analo- gous sentiments. Stoicism is a doctrine of excessive tension (tovos) against everything which may appear indulgence to human nature. Epicurus attained a kind of asceti- cism from an excessive desire for apathy; in their search for impassiveness the Stoics eventually de- spised pain, and even brought themselves into the mental attitude of the martyrs; their love of virtue led them to the conclusion that it is nowhere to be found. We must not be led astray by their maxim, ^rjv ofjLoXoyovfieviDs, which was very rapidly completed by the disciples of Cleanthes, if not, indeed, by Cleanthes himself, ofioXoyovfihio^ ry v(r€t ^rjv. For it is not a question with them of living according to human nature, but rather according to the rule which governs all nature, the Xoyos immanent, at the same time both reason and providence, which is the THE STOIC MORALITY. 121 principle of order in the universe, and should be in man the principle of that order, that harmony, and that beauty in which virtue essentially consists. " Our own natures are parts of universal nature, our end is therefore to live conformably to nature."^ To introduce the least disorder into the universe is to be vicious, and in vice, as in virtue, there are no degrees. ^*A man in the water does not drown any more at six feet deep than at six hundred below the surface of the water." The recognition of a possible progress towards the highest virtue, a progress which was already the sign of a virtuous nature, was a tardy improvement of the doctrine. The wise man could not have one virtue without having them all. But where are we to find that wise man ? Air men, then, were "mad, impious, and slaves," for the Stoics themselves confessed that they had never seen their ideal realised. This was because the wise man ought not only to have all the virtues, to be "the sole just and pious man, the sole priest, the sole savant and poet, the friend, citizen, general, magis- trate, orator, dialectician, and grammarian " par excellence, but he ought also to experience no passion, for passion is an " irrational movement of the soul, a stormy and immoderate impulse, contrary to nature," from which the virtuous being is exempt because he is infallible.^ No doubt there were noble affections which the Stoics admired — joy, rational elevation as opposed to pleasure, circumspection and will — but the ideal state was none the less in their eyes impassivity, the absence of all abandonment to pleasure or pain, and * Renouvier, Manuel de Philosophie ancienne, t. ii. p. 282. 2 Cf. Diogenes, Life of Zeno, vii. io8-ii8. 122 THE MORAL TENDENCIES. they did not desire to experience happiness except under abnormal tension. Pity seems to have been unknown to them ; they praised friendship and practised it ; they gave noble examples of devotion and solidarity; and we cannot forget that it was one of the last of the Stoics who called himself a citizen of the world, extending his affection to the whole human race ; but there was in primitive Stoicism the unmistakable sign of appalling hardness of heart. How many forms of good were there on which the sage cast a disdainful glance? How many evils did he consider negligible ? Does pain depend on us? If it is not in our power to avoid it, or to cause it to cease, it is therefore a matter of indifference to us, it does not count: we need pay no attention to it. **The exist- ence of all so-called evils is explained by the necessities of organisation and life. These are all circumstances connected with the great final causes of the universe, and are therefore as such indifferent to the sage." This optimism, which sometimes had such tragical consequences, has some grandeur about it. It is a false grandeur nevertheless, like that of the man who does not wish his poverty to be seen. That psychology is erroneous which refuses to recognise that, in many cases, emotions and tendencies are normal facts of the mental life. It arbitrarily demands of human nature impossible sacrifices. 6i. The Msthetic Sentiment. The Stoics seem to have always given to their doctrine the attraction which a conception, that has THE iESTHETIC SENTIMENT. I23 for its centre the idea of the beautiful, always has on the human mind. They had conceived of the uni- verse as an admirable order, as a reality full of harmony and finality, in which the human mind aesthetic joy; was it not inevitable that man, in a could find a thousand motives of astonishment and spirit of what one may almost call sulkiness, should have attempted to destroy this marvellous totality ? ERRATUM. Page 123, 5/A and 6th lines should read : could find a thousand motives of astonishment and aesthetic joy ; was it not inevitable that man, in a bility and the understanding, a preparation, a were, for the moral sentiment. And it seems ti. he was right when he saw in aesthetics the "anti- chamber" of morality.^ The sense of the beautiful may, no doubt, be produced independently of every moral sentiment. All that is beautiful is not satisfy- ing to our conscience. Art aims at cultivating senti- ments, which, to be disinterested, in comparison with hedonistic and utilitarian tendencies, are none the less more akin to satisfactions of the intelligence than to moral satisfaction. A work of art, or a natural phenomenon worthy of admiration, appeals especially to^ the imagination and to the reason; to the one they give a free course in the field of the concrete, connected with the present perception and ^ Cf. Ruskiiii Sesame and Lilies, * * Taste is not only a part and an index of morality ; it is the only morality.'* — Tr. 124 'T^^ MORAL TENDENCIES. the idea at first evoked; to the other they allow its favourite occupation — synthesis, " subsumption," as Kant called it, of a multiplicity of data under the unity of the concept and of the multiplicity of con- cepts under the unity of the principle. Thus they procure for us the pleasure of amusement, of human amusement par excellence, unknown to animals because they have not a reason sufficiently exercised to ex- perience the pleasure of disentangling ideas, and of giving them the richest possible sensible expression. But in direct relation with conduct is the character of the " communicability " of aesthetic impressions and pleasures. Guyau put it very well when he said: "When I see the beautiful I want to be two."^ The enjoyment that one experiences in the contemplation of a work of art is one of those very rare enjoyments which we love to share with others, or to experience in common. The more numerous are those who share in an emotion of this kind, the deeper it is in each, and that because of the repercussion of the emotions of others in oneself. Then is produced in fact one of those phenomena of sympathy which are the point of departure of a new order of tendencies — the altruistic tendencies.^ 62. The Altruistic Tendencies? Sympathy in its rudimentary form is nothing more than a physiological and mental adaptation to a fact 1 Cf. Guyau, ProbUmes de V EsthHique Contemporaine, — Tr. 2 Cf. Ribot, op, ciL, chap, x.— Tr. ^ Ribot, op, cit,y chap, iv., "On the different and conflicting degrees of altruism;" vide Sorley, op, cit,, p. 143. — Tr. THE ALTRUISTIC TENDENCIES. I25 of emotional expression in another.^ The animal is not incapable of experiencing its effects; man ex- periences them much more keenly because his mind is simpler, and his spontaneous reactions are less obstructed or inhibited by reflection or by counter associations of an empirical origin. In the presence of a being exhibiting keen pleasure or pain, the intelligent and "naive" animal (if I may use this word of the being in whom are absent the "antagonistic reductives,'' which ordinarily place an obstacle in the way of suggestibility or credulity) permits its clear consciousness to be invaded by the, from that moment, very lively representation of the emotion of another; and in virtue of the well-known law in accordance with which the preponderant image pro- duces the realisation of the corresponding move- ment or system of movements, we see the spectator of the pain of a fellow-creature either betray signs of similar pain, or, at any rate, place himself where he can avoid the cause of the pain. In the same way he who is present at the experience of another's joy, if he is a simple soul in whom jealous senti- ments have not made their appearance, cannot fail to share that pleasure, even although he may not know why his fellow is rejoicing. Many acts of devotion and of heroic self-sacrifice are due to a sympathy as instinctive as it is elementary. How many men throw themselves into danger, blindly and without reflection, to help beings whom they do not know, who have never inspired them with affection, simply from the effect of the sympathetic impulse ! ^ * Lloyd Morgan, Introduction to Comparative Psychology ^ p. 321 ; ib,^ Psychology for Tecuhers^ p. 234 ; James, , r//., pp. 10-27; James, o/>, ctf,, ii. p. 427; Ribot, oJ>, cif., p. 198 and pp. 329 ei seq. ; Guyau, Education and Heredity^ p. 164. — Tr. RISK AND EXERCISE. 151 little by little the circle of activity, habit allows the mind, assured of the docility of the organism, to do its own work and to develop regularly; and the more it understands the more it can understand." By the side of these intellectual pleasures, which may be renewed and widened in proportion as the sphere of the activity is renewed and widened, are the social pleasures which also widen the field of difficulties to be overcome, the sphere of pleasures that a reasonable being can procure for himself. It is therefore not a restricted, humble, and mean life — that kind of stupor which the Epicureans called apathy — which suits man's nature; it is the widest possible life, the boundaries of which the scientific, aesthetic, and social activity is incessantly moving farther and farther back, surrounding it with mov- ing horizons which we know must become more and more distant, to procure again and again an infinite number of new pleasures and new joys. To the question, What are the inferior and what are the superior joys ? we can therefore answer without hesitation : — the inferior joys are those which, ever restricting the field of human activity, create needs from which man cannot free himself to taste other joys. Higher joys are, on the contrary, those which never enslave man, which procure for him ample and fruitful satisfaction, and cause him to live with the utmost possible intensity in the widest and most varied environment. The idea of these joys crowns our conception of the moral ideal from the psycho- logical point of view. 152 THE DETERMINISM OF IMMORAL ACTIONS. The Determinism of Immoral Actions. 72. Crime. We can now understand how it so frequently happens that men commit faults or fall into crime. The tendencies to co-ordinate are so numerous, the sentiments which ought to predominate have so little sensible attraction, moral pleasure is so un- common, and virtue so difficult to realise, that we ought not to be astonished at the moral poverty of humanity. Let us then enter into detail as to the determining causes of crime or offences : we shall see how errors of conduct are connected with the defects of our physio- logical, mental, or social nature, and how unnecessarj^ is the intervention of the vicious choice of free will to explain the fundamental or accidental mechanism of man. The civil law calls every infringement of its pre- scriptions crime or misdemeanour. Every infringe- ment of the moral law is an offence; but while the civil laws are clearly defined, the moral laws are often indeterminate. We cannot even say that everything that is contrary to the collective consciousness is a fault, for this varying opinion of the multitude, to which those who have a good reputation conform, is not always such as should be respected or even faith- fully followed, since it sometimes issues in incon- sequences, and owing to its variations what was forbidden yesterday is legalised to-day. CRIME. 153 By what mark then is an offence to be recognised, if we cannot always consider as a moral failure what is a breach of the prescriptions of the collective conscience, whether these prescriptions are always formulated in the form of laws, or remain without formula although still authoritative ? Most of the actions which we regard as vicious or defective are only considered as such because they shock customs, prejudices, ideas accepted without criticism, and the sentiments instilled into the multi- tude by education, tradition, or imitation. In most cases, that which is considered as obligatory takes its necessity from the custom which transforms into rigorous duties transitory and often equivocal rules of conduct. Since the duty is not easy to determine, the fault is also difficult to define. So far, we have always reasoned on the hypothesis of a moral necessity to act according to human nature both psychological and sociological, and to give in con- sequence a rational continuation to the natural de- velopment of our being — granting that it is impos- sible to adopt a line of conduct which does not take into account the requirements of human nature. Fault may therefore be defined in a very general manner as every action contrary to our nature and to social evolution. Vice is therefore the habit of realising acts which are related to a conduct to which the psycho-sociological study of man can give no sanction. But these ideas are in both cases still too vague. Conduct must be systematic. When we speak of a line of conduct, we are as a rule expressing by means of a metaphor the bond which exists 154 THE DETERMINISM OF IMMORAL ACTIONS. between the different stages of an activity as methodic as the moral activity should be. Given that moral action is a voluntarj^ act, or the habitual reproduction of a voluntary act, and that every act of this nature is only such by reason of the inter- vention of the character in deliberation and choice^ and that it therefore flows from the agent's per- sonality, one and identical with itself, does it not follow that conduct ought to be one and identical with itself, Uke the ego, whose unity does not prevent complexity, and whose identity does not prevent development ? It is the most essential characteristic tendencies which remain identical in the agent, and it is the manifestations of these tendencies which remain identical in the conduct. But it is impossible for contradictory acts to be accomplished at the same moment, and at two different moments the acts accomplished cannot show by their radical opposition that they do not form part of the same future. Conduct, however, may be, as we have seen, at once systematically and profoundly vicious. The man who persists in pursuing his evil courses presents neither mental instability nor anything abnormal from the psychological point of view. The mark of his bad conduct will therefore no longer be a fault of intrinsic systematisation, but an incurable discord with the state of society in which he lives. No doubt it may happen that a man of the highest moral worth, a Socrates, for example, may find him- self out of harmony with the social system of his time; but the discord is but transitory, and it is bound to disappear with the improvement of an environment which at first is unsympathetic, and CRIME AND THE CRIMINAL. 153 then, little by little, places itself in harmony with the conduct of the virtuous man. Even if harmony is not always established, at any rate it can always be established; and the sociologist who knows the determinism of social facts, who can foresee^ as far as one ever can foresee, the course of events, may assert that conduct is good when it can be reconciled with one of the possible social systems in the near future or in a future which at the present moment is in the way of realisation. Conduct is therefore reprehensible, because it is either intrinsically unsystematic, contradictory, or un- co-ordinated, now or in its future, or because it is in contradiction with the psychological and sociological laws of nature and of the future. Because it is such, we may assert with the utmost confidence that it deprives the agent of a lasting happiness, and of that moral joy which, as we have defined it, can never destroy the aptitude for higher joys. We shall now go into detail, and endeavour to discover the causes of the immorality which is re- vealed by offences. 73. Crime and the Criminal} Shall we class faults according to their gravity from the legal, from the psychological, or from the sociological point of view? For these three points of view are different. The fault in the eyes of the legislator and the judge is grave or light, according as it more or less chills the social con- science— ^that is to say, as long as it conceals a ^ Galton*s Human Faculty^ p. 61. 156 THE DETERMINISM OF IMMORAL ACTIONS. will in more or less marked opposition to the collec- tive sentiment, tradition, morals, and to the spirit of the law. But the consideration of these senti- ments, of these traditions, and of this spirit partakes of an eminently conservative tendency; this is be- cause the care of preserving ancient customs was predominant among the Jews; and at Athens, for instance, they compelled Socrates to drink hemlock and stoned the reformers, although their acts may have hardly been considered serious from the moral point of view. An offence in the eyes of the sociologist is only serious when, as we have seen, it risks the destruction of the social equilibrium and the continuity of the collective future ; in the eyes of the psychologist it is only serious when it is injurious to the mental well-being, the stability of the mental life, and the regularity of the psychic evolution. The moralist, who has the interests of both the psychologist and of the sociologist to bear in mind, cannot make an abstraction of the person, and if he cannot abstain from considering the individual in the social environment, he cannot do otherwise than see the act in the agent, and conceive of the action, on one side with its social effects, and on the other with its psychological and sociological factors. That is why, instead of classing crimes and mis- demeanours according to the gravity attached to them by the law, or even according to the social institutions injured by the delinquent, contemporary criminologists endeavour to make a classification of criminals. Lombroso^ makes of the criminal an ^ Havelock Ellis, op. ci!,^ p. 36.— Tr. CRIME AND THE CRIMINAL. 157 abstract being, analogous, as Ferri remarks, to Quetelet's "average man." His delinquent is a synthesis of the vices, faults, aptitudes, deformi- ties or anomalies observable in the different types, different enough for us to oppose to the illus- trious Italian anthropologist the work of Gall, Frdgier, Ferrus, Despine, Maudsley, Morselli, Sergi, and Ferri, among the numerous band who have tried to establish a classification of criminals. Gall dis- tinguished between the impulsive and the instinctive, originally vicious; Fr^gier, in his reflections on the memoirs of Vidocq, separated the professional from the chance or necessitous thief. E. Ferri recalls the enumeration made by Du Camp (without any scientific basis, let me remark), of the many varieties of the low-class thief and the swell mob. Ferrus classed delinquents according to their intellectual development: i, those who have moderate intelli- gence and bad congenital tendencies; 2, those who have ordinary intelligence, but are only addicted to debauchery, vagabondage, and crime from mental inertia and weakness of the moral sense; 3, those who from defective cerebral organisation are unfit for any serious occupation, whether they are per- verse, energetic, or intelligent, doing wrong in a systematic manner, or those who are vicious, obtuse, and incapable of resisting evil impulses, or finally, those who are criminal without having any notion of the nature of their acts. Despine drew a distinction between criminals cool, impulsive, morally abnormal, with or even without mental alienation. Huret, who has made a special study of convicts, divides them into three groups: the non-vicious, who have acted under the influence of a violent and 158 THE DETERMINISM OF IMMORAL ACTIONS. sudden emotion; the rebels, who are masters of the art of crime ; and those who are dull and brutalised, and who are sometimes dominated by their more fundamentally vicious companions. Ferri has endeavoured to show the existence of two great classes of criminals — the criminal born, the incorrigible, in whom crime is a habit, and the occasional delinquents, in whom the anatomical and psycho -pathological characteristics of Lombroso's criminal are more or less absent. In 1880 he pro- posed five categories connected with the two prin- cipal types — the insane; the criminal born; habitual, occasional, and impulsive delinquents. M. le Bon has also established the existence of two fundamental classes, that of criminals of here- ditary disposition ^ (criminal-born, impulsive, of weak character, and intelligent, but deprived of moral sense), and that of criminals in conse- quence of an acquired lesion of the moral sense (through alcoholism, general paralysis, cerebral lesions, etc.). M. Laccassagne distinguishes between criminals by sentiment or by instinct, vicious from heredity or acquired habit, occasional or impulsive delinquents, and insane delinquents. It is useless to multiply the analyses of so many classifications made from so many different points of view, among which those of Maudsley, Garofalo, Sergi, Yvernfes, are distinguished by etiological, psychological, or sociological considerations which, taken separately, have an importance of their own.^ ^ Vide a complete and impartial exposition of these theories in Ferri, Sociolcgia criminaU (4th edition, 1900). CLASSIFICATION AND DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY. I59 74. Classification and Descriptive Summary. From their comparative examination, says E. Ferri, it follows : first, that we must give up the old conception 'of the criminal of uniform type ; second, that the distinction between the occasional criminal who may be cured, and the delinquent by instinct and by hereditary tendency who is incorrigible, is generally accepted, as well as the subdivision into occasional and impulsive delinquents, the criminal- born and the insane criminal. It therefore seems that the classification which is based on the etiology of misdemeanour and crime should serve as a basis for the description of the essential characters of each criminal type, whether those characters are psychological or sociological. The criminal born is presented as savage, brutal, and knavish, incapable of distinguishing theft or crime from any kind of honest activity; he is a delinquent, according to Fr^gier,^ just as others are good workers, dreading pain more than he is affected by it when it is inflicted, for he considers a prison as an asylum where his subsistence is assured in idleness. He is always an impenitent recidivist. The habitual criminal is a weak character, who has often experienced a morbid impulse, and has been encouraged to the repetition of crime, sometimes by the impunity that is assured to acts but slightly criminal, and sometimes owing to bad company. Imprisonment, life in common with beings without morality, has been fatal to his moral sense, and has perverted or completely destroyed it. Imprisonment in a cell has stupefied him, alcoholism has brutalised ^ Les classes dangJreuses, p. 175, Brussels, 1840. l6o THE DETERMINISM OF IMMORAL ACTIONS. him, and the fact that society will have none of him from the time of his first lapses, has thrown him into idleness and exposed him to every kind of temptation.^ His characteristics are precocity and a tendency to the repetition of crime. This type is that of many young fellows, morally abandoned by their families or brought up in the midst of vice, and it is men like him, as the numbers of this class increase, who make juvenile criminality more and more a subject of anxiety. 75. The Criminal by Accident^ The criminal by accident and the criminal by impulse are distinct from the criminal-born and from the delinquent in whom crime has become habitual from a kind of impotence to resist certain impulses; the psycho-pathological nature of which is evident. The former experience no repugnance in doing wrong ; the latter do it sometimes in spite of their repugnance, or at any rate in spite of their habitual tendency to abstain from offensive and criminal actions. They usually present, under most circum- stances in their lives, the character of normal beings of variable intelligence. However, when we examine them closely, we quickly discover in them a weak will, a mental instability, sometimes generalised and sometimes purely intellectual or emotional ; and it is precisely this lack of strength of character which is the cause of their not resisting the " psychological storm," as Ferri calls the disorder of mind caused by a strong passion, by sudden impulse due to instinctive ^ E. Ferri, op, cit. , p. 228. ■* Lombroso, The Female Offender^ chap, xiii.— Tr. THE CRIMINAL BY ACCIDENT. l6l sympathy, to imitation or to moral contagion, or finally to the generally subconscious obsession which slowly brings on the inevitable crisis ih which some- times both the honour and the morality of an indi- vidual are wrecked. The impulsive are sometimes recognised by their continual exaltation, their irrita- bility, and their promptitude to re-act violently even under slight stimuli ; and at other times again they are merely extravagant in their sentiments, manners, language, re-actions, and tendencies on some single point. They are shrewd as far as all other questions are concerned ; they show lack of judgment, lack of tact, and lack of restraint, whenever the object of their passion is the cause of it ; they are ready to burst into a fury if we "touch the tender spot.'" The impulsive and the accidental delinquent may frequently fall into the repetition of crime, contrary to the opinion, of certain criminologists, who are parti- cularly anxious to place the two principal classes of criminals in contrast with respect to this point. Now nothing guarantees them against the involun- tary return to fresh offences, but after each lapse they again show repentance, a sincere regret for the evil action of which their weakness is the cause, and which they voluntarily attribute to fate, to a force greater than themselves, so conscious are they of not having acted in accordance with the fundamental tendencies of their being. There is therefore every reason to distinguish them clearly from the brutes whose moral sense has been obliterated by heredity or bad habit. But should not both of these classes be brought into closer relation to the case of the insane criminal ? l62 THE DETERMINISM OF IMMORAL ACTIONS. 76. Insane Criminals.^ Do not these form a very complex class, from which might be established numerous subdivisions corresponding to every possible type of immorality ? Should we not find in this class the analogue not only of the born criminal, of the criminal by habit, of the impulsive and of the accidental delin- quent, but also of every being who has vices less odious than those of the criminal, or who simply and accidentally commits faults and immoral actions ? Are not all the facts of immorality cases of more or less attenuated " moral insanity " ? By the words "moral insanity" we generally understand a particular kind of mental infirmity, which especially consists in a defect or a disturbance of the moral sense, without the intellectual functions being necessarily affected; that is why Prichard^ called it moral insanity with much more accuracy than Verga, who called it reasoning mania. For it is not so much a question of the preservation of the power of reasoning, which in certain cases may be weakened, as of the weakness of the power of acting in a rational, systematic manner. Certain Anglo- American alienists have preferred to the names of moral insanity, moral imbecility, or reasoning mania, that of affective insanity, the term which is used by Savage and Hughes.^ ^ Despine, Psychologie Naturelle, ii. pp. 169 et seq.; Maudsley, Pathology of Mind; Art. ** Criminal Anthropology," by H. Ellis, Dictionary of Psychological Medicine ; Guyau, EduccUion et Hiriditi^ p. 94; Lombroso, The Female Offender^ chaps, xvii., xviii.; Maudsley, Body and Mind, pp. 62 et seq. — Tr. 2 Cf. Ribot, op. cit., pp. 300, 301.— Tr. ^ Maudsley, Responsibility in Mental Disease, chap, v., Part I. — Tr. IMMORALITY OF THE IMBECILE. 163 As a matter of fact, moral madness seems to be no- thing but a morbid condition corresponding to the numerous relations of conduct with the varied forms of mental alienation. There are no doubt especially interesting cases in which with a remarkable activity of the intellectual functions by a curious anomaly is combined exceptionally vicious conduct ; but how can we establish a distinction between these cases and those in which we see progressively an ineptitude to moral life, associating itself with lower and lower de- grees of intellectual life ? Is there not a continuous series of which pure moral imbecility is the last term while ordinary imbecility or idiocy is the first term ? Can we state an essential difference between the im- morality of the idiot and that of the " moral madman " ? 77. Immorality of the Imbecile} To the brutality, the knavery, and the idleness of the born criminal correspond the tendencies of certain imbeciles who are, as M. Sollier^ points out, wicked, idle, misguided, anti-social beings, and, as M. Legrain^ puts it, sly and vicious creatures, im- pelled by a kind of destructive instinct (although certain of them may be gentle, kind, and bene- volent).^ Now ought we not to consider idiocy and imbecility as the inferior degrees of that degeneration ^ Guyau, Education et Heriditiy p. 94 ; Maudsley, Body and Mindy pp. 65 etseq,^ and Responsibility in Menial Disease, pp. 179 et seq. — Tr. 2 Psychologie de V Idiot et de V Imbecile, Alcan, 1891. ' Du Dilire chez les Degeneres, * D. Fran9ois . . . imbecile aged forty, watches with the greatest care' over his idiot brother and sister ; he lavishes on them the most assiduous attention, and shows exemplary kindness to everybody. (Observation taken in the asylum, Alen$on. ) 164 THE DETERMINISM OF IMMORAL ACTIONS. which causes certain insane people to have a moral future analogous to the abnormal development of the hardened criminal, persisting in immorality in spite of even the most severe pain ? Between the imbecile and the " moral madman " there is only a difference of degree, no difference in nature. The former is degenerate, because the check to his development that he has undergone has deprived him of certain intellectual faculties, and at the same time of higher affections and of every normal moral sentiment. The latter is a degenerate in whom the check of development has only affected a smaller number of mental functions, so that higher modes of the intelligence have appeared, but the correspond- ing modes of sensibility and activity have been unable to effect their normal evolution. M. Magnan considers the imbecile as " an idiot, in whom certain centres of the anterior cerebral region have been left unaffected,'/ and who is therefore " capable of ideo- motor determinations,'' capable of "penetrating into the domain of intellectual control," and of raising him- self sometimes so far as to possess curious aptitudes, until he becomes what has been called a "partial genius." 1 If he only lacks moral aptitudes he no longer pre- sents the characters of ordinary imbecility. There is nothing in him now but " moral imbecility." Need his immorality be explained otherwise than in those cases in which the degree of intelligence is much less ? 78. Intelligent Degenerates, The intelligent degenerate, like the habitual criminal, is precocious in vice; he does wrong for ^ Magnan, Lemons cliniques sur les Maladies mentales, Alcan, 1897. INTELLIGENT DEGENERATES. 165 wrong's sake with a kind of morbid enjoyment. He is proud of his increasing perversity, and he does not hide his immorality under a bushel. Prompt to imitate bad actions, he contracts from an early age vicious habits, which will be so many centres of attraction for further depraved habits. B. R.^ is eighteen years of age: he belongs to an unbalanced family; his father is alcoholic, his mother is a prostitute; his eldest brother, at present a deserter, has been sent to a disciplinary regiment ; another brother is confined in a house of correction. From the age of nine he tried to rival his mother's immorality. From this resulted a morbid tendency to the satisfaction of the sexual instinct, which impelled this youth at the age of thirteen to various brutal assaults upon women and girls. At present B. R. . . . has no pleasure left to him except that which he experiences in relating his deeds of sexual perversity; he shows no remorse, he has no con- sciousness of the repulsion that is inspired by his assaults, and by the whole of his evil past. On the 28th May 1900, he succeeds in making his escape for several hours, and commits new crimes. On the 22nd April he walks in front of a group of women and girls whose attention he wishes to attract. He does not succeed, and ascertains with disgust that a megalo-maniac has much more chance of attracting the attention of this group of women. He then pro- ceeds to shout, gesticulate, jump, and dance about on the ground; then being seized as it were with a fit ' The observations on this case of moral insanity are due to the •kindness of Dr. Tourniac, Medical Superintendent of the asylum at Auxerre, who has been good enough to allow me to share in his researches on mental alienation. 1 66 THE DETERMINISM OF IMMORAL ACTIONS. of fury, he strikes his keepers, breaks the panels of* the doors, and then calms down suddenly when he finds out that at last they have noticed him. Several times, and here again simply to attract attention, he pretended to commit suicide, and at last one day, the victim of his own antics, he really hanged himself. This, then, is the case of a degenerate in whom the sexual instinct, combined with vanity, played the principal r6le. He experienced neither affection, nor modesty, nor restraint, nor religious feeling, nor the aesthetic sense. He was a knave, a hypocrite, revengeful, incapable of feeling regret or remorse, insensible to reproaches, to contempt, or to affec- tionate words. He was for a considerable period in a house of correction, and his fundamental worthless- ness was increased by his contact with numerous little good-for-nothings, to whom he admiringly related his prowess. He especially frequented the society of adults, so that he might learn from them as much wickedness as possible. Now this is a monster from the moral point of view, but a monster with an intellectual side. Why is he so profoundly vicious, if not because his physical and mental con- stitution, his cerebral capacity, have not allowed the development of those affectionate, aesthetic, and social sentiments, without which, as we have seen, morality cannot exist ? If he may serve as an example of the delinquent from vicious habit, do we not see that criminals of this type may, at any rate for the most part, be fairly compared to the insane, whether criminals or not, whom congenital or acquired degeneration has shut up in our asylums ? THE UNBALANCED. 167 79. The Unbalanced. There is among the criminals of whom we speak a considerable number of people who show signs of elevated sentiments, and in whom it would seem there is no defect in that mental development which permits us to judge sanely and to feel keenly the immorality of criminal actions. These are compar- able to other insane cases of which Fr. . . . may furnish a type. Fr. ... is the eldest of a family of eight children, which does not contain any other disequilibrated member, but of which two or three are of doubtful morality. He is a well-educated man who has received an excellent secondary education, and who thoroughly understands the arguments one opposes to his own, and who can engage in discussion with considerable sagacity, but who obviously uses his intellectual aptitudes to justify the acts he commits after they have been committed. He abused, the confidence of a post-office employ^ to make him hand over letters addressed to two of his brothers with whom he had had some disagreement. He wrote threatening letters to people, who were not much troubled thereby, and who thought, not with- out reason perhaps, that they were attempts at blackmail. He attracted to himself the attention of the public by foolish or criminal acts with the object of embarrassing his family because they had refused him money. Fr. ... is therefore, from the practical point of view, an anti-social being, a delinquent who would probably not refrain from crime if he had the opportunity. On several occasions he has threatened cruel vengeance to his keepers if he should ever get l68 THE DETERMINISM OF IMMORAL ACTIONS. out of the asylum. He is revengeful and spiteful; in fact, all his acts belie his words; but as he has considerable intelligence, he explains all his antics in the most astonishing way; he knows how to present them in the most favourable light, and if he cannot justify them completely, at any rate he diminilshes their importance in such a way that he thinks he is entirely free from blame, and therefore experiences no remorse. Now, if we look into this closely, we see that the sentiments he expounds so brilliantly, and with which one would almost think he was saturated, are only skin deep. He is never really moved, either by suffering or by the happiness of others; he is incapable of a generous action or of a disinterested movement. He has an abstract con- ception of the sentiments of which he speaks, but he no longer experiences them. Is not this a remark- able case of the failure of the affective part of a being, much anterior to the intellectual failure which no doubt will later ensue ? And may not this observation serve to explain how criminals without any apparent mental anomaly are scarcely more able than imbeciles, or inferior de- generates, to re-act against their gross appetites and their increasing tendencies to vicious and immoral activity ? 80. The Criminal by Passion.^ We now pass on to a class intermediary between that of criminals from inveterate, vicious habit, and ^ Havelock Ellis, The Criminal^ p. 2 ; Hoffbauer, Mid, Ug, relcUive aux alihth, 1837, pp. 259-270; Fere, Pathology of Einotiofts^ p. 506; Ribot, op, cit.y p. 301 ; Lombroso, The Female Offender ^ chap. xv. ; Maudsley, Responsibility in Mental Disease, chap. v. — Tr. THE CRIMINAL BY PASSION. 169 that of occasional criminals, that of the criminal by passion, whether obsessed or not. We can scarcely refuse to recognise the relationship of these young evil-doers, of these beings who are so often dangerous, and who suddenly and unexpectedly commit the greatest crimes, to certain cases of insanity, of which the girl PI. . . . will exhibit to us both the character and the mode of action. PI. ... is a girl of fifteen, who on the 20th of July 1899 voluntarily set fire to a rick of hay,^ and who on the i8th August in the same year tried to suffocate the child of her master, aged thirteen months. She did not confess these crimes until the 26th August, having done all she could until then to escape suspicion. Since then it seems she has experienced no remorse, has shown no regret, and when questioned on the subject of her acts, she speaks of them with astounding placidity; at most she is annoyed because she is questioned so often. She has stated to the magistrate that she was not at all affected when she committed the second crime, and witnesses affirm that she showed no emotion when she was told of its discovery. Now what is most surprising is that she had never shown the least sentiment of hostility to her masters, and that she admitted she had always been well treated by them. She asserts that she did nothing from anger or from a spirit of vengeance. ' Pyromania is sometimes found unassociated with other forms of mental disorder. But it is also found in association with thievish impulses, suicidal tendencies, religious mania, and with disorders of the sexual functions. — Vide Maudsley, Responsibility in Mental Disease^ pp. 81, 161, 163; Ribot, op, cit»y p. 225; Morselli, Suicide^ pp. 123, 151.— Tr. 170 THE DETERMINISM OF IMMORAL ACTIONS. and it really seems that never having been re- proached, never having suffered the slightest annoy- ance in the house, she could not have been urged to these crimes through any malicious feeling. But if she felt no hatred, and if she did not act under the influence of anger, at any rate she was not restrained by any feeling of affection, for she shows herself quite incapable of experiencing such a feeling. She does not like animals. She experiences none of the pleasures of children of her own age, or even of younger children. She declares that she has never strangled birds or drowned cats; but if it were done in her presence she would be indifferent, and to everything she shows the same indifference. She did not want to go to a concert: "it would not be unpleasant, but at the same time would not please her." She would not put herself out either to see a beautiful picture or to hear beautiful singing. This absence of interest in most of the objects which attract the attention of the normal child has turned PI. . . . into a naughty school-girl, learning nothing and remembering nothing of the lessons she received. She knows perfectly well, however, that certain actions are dishonest or criminal ; she under- stands that there are crimes which are repugnant to the conscience of most people. A proof of this is, that she does not ignore the misconduct of her mother; that she knows quite well why her father left his family and went to live away; and yet she refuses to give the least explanation on this point. It is not that she disapproved personally of her mother's acts, but rather, that she learned by experi- ence and since her childhood that it was not a thing which ought to be talked about; and in the same THE CRIMINAL BY PASSION. I7I way she does not wish to speak of her own crimes : she pretends to remember nothing at all, not even the name of her late master.^ The indifference in matters of morality which seems to us well established in the present case, has permitted the sudden rise and development of impulses. PL . . . has many times confessed that she had no idea of suffocating the child when cross- ing the threshold of the court, through which she had to pass from the stable (where she had been quietly milking with her mistress and another servant), in order to reach the dwelling, where she was going to a small cistern. She went into the room where her little victim was sleeping and placed the infant between two feather-beds; she removed a pane of glass which was almost out of the window, carefully opened the window, and left it open to encourage the idea of the criminal being a miscreant from without, an enemy of the house. During the course of the day she went to the cellar and upset the butter and the milk further to confirm the notion (and in this she was quite successful) that the act was that of a stranger. The impulse was not therefore followed by forgetfulness; it did not form part of a moment in which the consciousness was less clear, in which the personality underwent a transitory change, or in which was produced, as it were, a fugitive mental alienation. The impulse is easily integrated while it lasted, and although it seems inexplicable when we take all the antecedents into account, it ex- plains a whole series of consequences: the new crime, and the period of long dissimulation, which does not, however, seem to cause distress to the ^ Cf. Havelock Ellis, op. cit., pp. 7, 211.— Tr. 172 THE DETERMINISM OF IMMORAL ACTION. young criminal, in spite of the suspicions which were entertained by the servant, who alone was wiser in this respect than the other people in the house. The incendiary and homicidal impulses have on all points the same characteristics. There is no hysteri- form character, no somnambulism, nothing but mental instability and a fairly complete absence of the social sentiments; the causes of the crime are therefore deficient rather than efficient. And so it is with the faults committed by most degenerates; such as, for instance, the impulsive who strike their relations or the friends of the house rather than strangers or enemies. From the moral point of view they are little better than the weak- minded, the imbeciles, or idiots, who have no sys- tematic conduct, who are more or less incapable of co-ordinating their desires or actions; who have undergone an arrested development, not only in their intellectual faculties, but in their sentiments, tend- encies, and aptitude to experience emotions; who, in short, would be led to automatic and instinctive rather than to intelligent and reflective activity, but who have unfortunately neither the fixed and power- ful instincts of the animal, nor the still tenacious habits of the insane, nor of those men of the world who are really automxata as far as politeness and good manners are concerned. According to M. Dallemagne, "given that every individual act of the normal life, and therefore every social manifestation, affects directly or indirectly the three great functions, the nutritive, the genetic, and the intellectual," crime is due to the unsatiated or incompletely satiated needs which refer to these great functions. "The unsatisfied functions create THE CRIMINAL BY PASSION. 173 in their respective centres a tension which objectively renders the consecutive discharge more violent and more spontaneous, and subjectively gives rise to the whole gamut of sensations, which range from the simple feeling of indefinable uneasiness to the pain which overclouds and obscures the consciousness.'* This, in many cases, is the explanation even of morbid impulses; but in crime there is something else besides impulses, something more than the auto- matism of different centres; there is a functional incapacity of certain centres, the temporary or de- finitive inhibition of certain functions, and the non- co-ordination of certain others — in short, mental instability, with the resultant clouding over or pro- gressive disappearance of the representations, tend- encies, and sentiments which are indispensable to mental and moral equilibrium. Hence there is no reasoning issuing in moral conclusions: there is no longer any room except by accident for subtle cal- culations determined by an affection or an inclination of an inferior order. The misdemeanours of a vagabond life form the simplest type of the immoral effects of pathological instability. There is no family sentiment, no love of work, respect for the law, for authority, for human dignity ; no socialj aesthetic, and religious tendencies — if ever these different affective methods have existed in the mind of the vagabond; there is nothing but a morbid love of change of residence, and of living on the proceeds of chance. How many bad habits and tendencies then spring into being, which are with difficulty restrained! for they meet with no obstacle of a moral nature, because such obstacles either have not bQQa formed, or, if 174 THE DETERMINISM OF IMMORAL ACTIONS. formed, have disappeared. Thus the danger that society runs from these vagabonds is considerable, although, taken individually, these poor wretches are rather amorphic than wicked. 8i. The Obsessed. If we now leave these degenerates, if we pass on from moral imbecility, characterised as we have seen by weakness of the affective factors of the moral determination, we still find the impulsive and the obsessed, but of a new type — namely, those who resist for a greater time their morbid tendencies, who see their immoral or absurd character, but who ex- perience no relief until they have yielded to them. Are not many criminal or immoral actions the result of obsessions? We are the less able to deny this because the latter are for the most part subconscious, and are concealed from the eyes of the psycho- logist by the impulsive movement, censured as soon as it takes place, but inevitable. When they become conscious they are already too strong to be effec- tively met. X. ... is prosecuted for indecent assault. His " exhibitionist " mania takes place at almost regular periods and under well-determined circumstances; he has, as it were, gusts of anger, and passes through a kind of crisis which is excessively painful ; he loses his self-control, and gives free play to manifestations which cause him no gratification but the sense of relief from his obsession. Sometimes the struggle against the obsession lasts for months; sometimes for a few days, hours, or minutes. Some people experience an irresistible THE OBSESSED. I75 impulse to insult their relations, to strike their best friend, to throw their glass or their napkin at the face of their host, or to break some trifling object. Beings such as these occupy an intermediary zone between moral sanity and affective madness.^ To give a satisfactory explanation of their conduct we must evidently connect it with that of the "fixed ideas," which are so numerous in hysteria, neuras- thenia, and all those forms of the insanity of the degenerates who used to be called monomaniacs. It seems that the "fixed idea" arises from the pathology of attention.^ In normal attention, an idea, a sentiment, or an image is maintained for a longer or shorter period in the clearness of con- scious apperception; during this period it inhibits every mental process which would challenge its supremacy; by its duration it assures its own dis- tinctness, and it only disappears when the repre- sentation which it has announced or prepared has arrived, and into which it is converted, as it were, by a blending of the successive moments of the conscious life. For this to be so, all that is required is that a very strong tendency shall dominate the mental future; for the successive representations to be as rich as the normal adaptations of a being to its environment demand, the dominating tendencies of the mind ^ Cf. Cull^re, Les Frontieres de la Folic, Paris, 1888. 2 I can only give in these pages a summary of the results I have stated at length in my volume on Mental Instability (Alcan, 1899). See, in particular, pp. 206 et seq., on Morbid Stability. On the *' insistent" idea, z^/V/*? James, op. cit., ii. 549; Ribot, op. cil., p. 226 ; Guyau, Education et Wriditi^ pp. 44, 56 ; Janet, VAuto- tnatisme Psychologique^ pp. 428 et seq., where will be found many bibliographical references; also vide his Nhroses^ etc., below. — Tr. 176 THE DETERMINISM OF IMMORAL ACTIONS. must be fruitful, and form a solid body of appeti- tions, numerous and in harmony with the different conditions of a suitable existence. But if these tendencies no longer form a harmonious whole, if they are, for instance, dissociated by those "emotion- shocks," of which MM. Janet and Raymond have shown the sinister power, there is no longer any place for normal attention. It then happens that the unco-ordinated tendencies dominate in turn the conscious future, and other tendencies blindly endeavour to replace them, and persist in the subconscious domain, while the first promptly disappear without having had any lasting action. Among the tendencies which remain in the mind and increase in power, we must place in the first rank those which have their basis in the organic sensations, such as, for example, the sexual instinct, which also gives an explanation of the frequency of the obsessions and impulses connected with this predominant appetite in animal life. Let a favourable occasion present itself, and im- mediately the subconscious tendency, however sub- ordinate it may have been, becomes sovereign and determines the irresistible impulse. If it meets some obstacle, the subject becomes more and more con- scious of it, and while it thus has a kind of demi- apperception, the obsession lasts and a painfiil struggle ensues. If the obstacle is very great the tendency to struggle is forgotten, although it is ready to reappear. That is why obsessions are so varied both in their period and in their psychological effect. M. P. Janet admits that the morbid stability to which the fixed idea is reduced is certainly the EXAGGERATION OF GOOD SENTIMENTS. l^^ consequence of the disappearance of the normal attention. He always gives the name of mental disaggregation to this psychological discontinuity, which, as he himself agrees, favours and permits im- pulses and obsessions. This I have preferred to call mental instability; the name, however, matters but little.^ In the same way, it is to mental instability and to the discontinuity of our psychological life consequent on the downfall of our normal tendencies, that the misdemeanours and crimes to which our im- pulsives and occasional delinquents are attracted are due. Desire only becomes passion, and only acquires excessive and afterwards tyrannical power, by the inconstancy of the appetitions and repulsions which normally serve as "antagonistic reducers."^ 82. Exaggeration of Good Sentiments. There are degenerates who become misdemeanants by the morbid exaggeration of sentiments which are praiseworthy enough, no doubt, but which encourage in them an excessive susceptibility. Such is the case of B.E., a young fellow of thirty-two years of age, who has twice been condemned to ten years' imprison- ment, and was confined on the last occasion in the criminal asylum of Gaillon, from which he emerged with the reputation of being violent and dangerous. At present he shows great sensibility, a keen desire to lead an honest life, and a real aptitude for the experience of the most delicate emotions; he would seem to be inspired with lofty sentiments. He also ^ Cf. Pierre Janet, Nivroses et Idees fixes, pp. 34, 53, 68, 217, 2i8. ^ Cf. Instabilite vientale, p. 216. 12 178 THE DETERMINISM OF IMMORAL ACTIONS. shows intelligence and good will, and an inclination to the good, to generosity, to sociability, and to affection. One is astonished to hear a criminal who has been punished so severely eagerly expressing the desires of the most perfectly honourable man ; and one asks oneself how he could have been the accomplice in the first place of a theft, in the second of a brutal assault, and finally of acts of violence due to sus- picion of the administration of the penitentiary and of the alienists who were attending him. But one quickly finds out that he is extremely sus- ceptible. The slightest thing depresses him. One feels that he is not made for an existence such as ours, in which there are so many disappointments, so much distrust, and in which so much injustice ought to be quickly and rapidly forgotten. He hates society, which has made of him a thing degraded for ever both in his own eyes and in the eyes of others. At eighteen years of age he was convicted as a vagabond and sentenced to a week's imprison- ment. Ever since then, he says, he has done no good. He was ashamed to present himself any- where to ask for work, and he became the prey of a few scoundrels who made him their accomplice. When overcome by excitement, he cannot regain his self-control; he is aboulic, he cannot resist; and he is violent because he is aboulic, and because the re- actions of anger find in him no "antagonistic re- ducer." Thus he ended by being placed under the ban of society. In his case the occasional and the impulsive criminal are united. Now the facility with which the moral vertigo takes possession of him is really remarkable; a word of encouragement or of praise MORAL VERTIGO. I79 makes him capable of extreme devotion, and in certain cases makes of him a fanatic. But any sign of disapprobation depresses him, and then for the merest trifle, for a joke or some foolery of his com- panions or his keepers, he loses his head and strikes or breaks with a violence of which one could hardly believe him capable. At the slightest contradiction, or at the least sign of satisfaction with him, he is beside himself with gloom or delight. He is very "suggestible,'* and the reading of books — almost children's books — such as the works of Jules Verne, made him delirious while he was staying at Gaillon. He thought he had written them, and he vaguely imagined a phantom ship which was destined to assure victory to the French fleet because of the terror it would inspire in the navy of the enemy. 83. Moral Vertigo} We see that such an aptitude to vividly experience the most different impressions, and to give way to every kind of suggestion, would make of the best- intentioned beings misdemeanants and criminals; and then in poverty, for example, the opportunity presents itself to them to secure some temporary comfort, and the idea of theft and murder fascinates them. They forget everything else, they no longer experience honourable sentiments, they no longer reflect. It is like a transient mental alienation. On the other hand, their excessive emotional tendencies predispose them to fear, anger, exaggerated love, and ^ Havelock Ellis, 1900. 238 THE SOCIAL IDEAL. and try to surpass himself in laughter and in the dance. That is the supreme advice of Zarathustra." ^ This fantastic being who "sanctifies laughter" experiences neither remorse nor pity. " This is the new law, brethren, that I give you: be pitiless." Pity is the last sin to which Zarathustra is tempted. But while the God of the Christians died in his wish to sound the wicked depths of the human soul, and while he suffered from the shameful vices of his fellows, the God of Nietzsche has assured his triumph by respecting great misfortune and ugliness, and sparing it his pity. 115. Sacrifice of the Unfit " To spare future generations the depressing spec- tacle of poverty and ugliness, let what is ripe for death die; let us have the courage not to help those who fall, but to push them farther, so that they may fall the quicker. The sage ought not only to be able to bear the sight of the sufferings of others, but he ought to make them suffer without troubling his head with the idea of the tortures to which they are subjected. . . . Who would attain greatness if he did not feel the power and the will to inflict great suffering?'' The naturalistic idea of the struggle for existence has never been more vigorously pushed to its ex- treme consequences. No doubt Spencer had sketched the process of "all those agents who, undertaking to protect the incapable taken as a whole, do incontest- able harm, for they check the work of natural * Lichtenberger, op. cit,i p. 159. SACRIFICE OF THE UNFIT. 239 elimination by which society is continually purged." ^ But Spencer had admitted the good effect of indi- vidual altruism; he did not imagine, as did Nietzsche, an elite charged with the duty of annihilating as rapidly as possible the mass of unfortunates who are made unfit for the struggle for existence by their incurable infirmities or their natural weakness. No doubt the ferocity of the master, the disciple of Zarathustra, is simply frightful to our moral con- science, fashioned, it is true, by several centuries of that Christianity which Nietzsche abhors. Our hearts are weakened, and we have spent ourselves for a "morality of slaves." Under the pompous name of "the religion of human suffering" would be hidden on the one hand a decrease of vitality, an "ignominious mediocrity," and on the other hand the desire to give oneself an easy triumph through the sentiment of pity. " We do good to others just as we do ill to them, simply to give ourselves the feeling of power, and to submit them in a measure to our domination. The strong man of noble instincts seeks his equal to struggle with him. . . . The weak on the contrary will be content with inferior prey. The pitiful man is sure to meet with the minimum of resistance, and to reap a success with the minimum of danger to him- self." ^ And so, in the mind of Nietzsche, pity covers with a deceitful veil both pride and the selfishness of an inferior being without a spark of generosity. Pity appears to him, as it did to Spinoza, a depress- ing passion, which, by adding to the evils which * Vide "The Sins of Legislators" in The Man v. The State, passim ; Ritchie, Darwinism and Politics, pp. 28 et seq. — Tr. ^ Cf. Lichtenberger, op, cit,, p. 121. 240 THE SOCIAL IDEAL. are the lot of each the share that each takes in the evils of others, increases the sum-total of suffering in the world, and thus comes into conflict with a generally admitted principle — that progress should tend to a constant increase of the sum-total of happiness. Nietzsche points out the danger that humanity would run by over-indulgence towards certain forms of suffering, by the excessive development of a sensi- bility which would be apt to become morbid. There is an unhealthy sympathy against which men must become fortified, a sympathy displayed by neuro- paths for beings whom a little severity would cause to raise themselves, to pluck up courage, and to become useful once more to themselves and their fellows. The religion of suffering may serve as an excuse for many of these weaknesses, and Nietzsche has stigma- tised "that great volume of pity which is so remark- able at the present time" as a manifest index of an increasing fear of that suffering without which nothing great can ever be done. " It is in the school of suffering and of great suffering — do not you know it ?— ^and it is under this hard master alone that man has progressed. You would like if possible to abolish suffering. As for me, I should like to see a harder and worse life than there has ever yet been." In reality, Nietzsche wants man to be stronger than he has ever been, to be triumphant over suffering, and to raise himself to happiness by a really manly struggle, and this part of his doctrine lacks neither beauty nor depth of thought.^ ' Cf. Havelock Ellis, "Niet^sche^" Affirmations.— T^s., THE GOSPEL OF TOLSTOI. 24! 116. The Gospel of Tolstoi. How different is this to Tolstoi ! " The gospel of Tolstoi," says M. Darlu,i "differs but little from that of the Companions of the New Life, assembled at Boston by Thomas Lake Harris a quarter of a century before. " However, it seems that these noble ideas of pity, charity, and pardon have never penetrated so deeply into the human heart since the days of Christ. They have impressed on our sensibility an almost painful vibration." Tolstoi has, in fact, attempted a renais- sance of Christianity, while Nietzsche was raising his voice with energy against "a morality worthy of slaves." Wliat se^ms to me the culminating point in Tolstoi's theory is his fourth commandment from the Gospels.^ "Evil must not be resisted, but, on the contrary, we must bear with every insult, and even do more than is required of us. We must not judge, nor must we have part or lot in any legal judgment, since every man is himself full of faults, and has no right to teach others. By taking venge- ance we teach others to avenge themselves." The consequences of this commandment are by non-resistance to evil and injury, the suppression of the whole military and judicial apparatus; by the refusal to take part in a lawsuit, the negation of law and of every judicial institution. No army, no State, no Church, no means of coercion, even with respect to moral persons; humanity forming a whole, " living in constant contact with nature and at work — that is to say, under the very conditions that are 1 o/>. cit., p. 33. 2 p, 72. 16 242 THE SOCIAL IDEAL. necessary to peaceful happiness," ^ the abandonment of all the conquests of a civilisation which is detest- able from its moral results — that is the social ideal conceived by Tolstoi, corresponding to his ideal of individual life; happiness in the "sympathetic and free " labour of the fields, in family life, and in the free and benevolent relations of all mankind. 117. Renunciation. Tolstoi is the enemy of every tendency that may awaken jealousy and lead to strife between man and man, and that is, no doubt, why he condemns the sexual instinct, while glorifying family life. " Love," he says in his little work. The Relations between the Sexes, " from all that precedes it and follows it, and in spite of all our efforts to prove the contrary, both in prose and verse, never does and never can give the means of attaining an object that is worthy of man; it is, on the contrary, an obstacle to that end, . . . and reason shows us that continence is the only solution. ... Now let us suppose that chastity, the Christian ideal, were realised: what would happen ? We should find ourselves in complete agreement with religion and science." No doubt Tolstoi, later on, somewhat moderated this rather bold statement. He admitted marriage as a consequence of the " first common fall, considered as an act of for ever indissoluble marriage," but on the especial condition " that no one is harmed there- by." Thus he presents to us the Christian Pam- philus confessing to the pagan Julius his deep , affection for Madeleine, but at the same time men- * Kovalevsky, " La Morale de Tolstoi," in Morale sociale, p. 176. RENUNCIATION. 243 tioning the obstacle which, until then, had prevented him from carrying his project into execution. "A young man of my acquaintance is also in love with Madeleine. He is a Christian; he loves both of us tenderly, and I shall never consent to cause him pain by robbing him of every hope. Perhaps I shall marry later when I am quite convinced that no pain will be caused to any other person."^ Such a re- nunciation of love in the presence of friendship would have nothing surprising about it if it were merely a question of an exceptional case, in which friendship happens to be stronger than love. But Tolstoi claims to lay it down as a constant rule, by treating as brothers all those who place far above the satisfaction of individual appetite a good understand- ing, reciprocal confidence, and the common peace. And just as he has sacrificed sexual love to the love of humanity, Tolstoi sacrifices every economical and political organisation to the ideal of peace. He dreams of a patriarchal life from which all commerce has disappeared, in which the use of money is banished even for the purpose of almsgiving. "Every use of money, whatever it may be, is only the presentation of a bill of exchange drawn on the poor, or the transmission to a third person of a bill of exchange to enable him to pay the un- fortunate." Alms will never cause poverty to dis- appear: work alone can do that. " I ought to deprive the unfortunate of the work that they do for me, either by not having it done for me at all, or by doing it myself."^ I ought to renounce every luxury, everything that is superfluous, ^ Pamphile et Julius^ pp. 95-icx). ^ Tolstoi, Que Faire ? pp. 243-249. 244 THE SOCIAL IDEAL. to live the common life with the utmost frugality, amid the riches of nature, and, as M. Gide puts it, in a " homogeneous and amorphous " society. Tolstoi is, in fact, the enemy of modern science and art. " The sciences ignore the questions of life. . . . Science and art have failed in their mission. . . . Supreme wisdom has other bases than the human intellect and science."^ His philosophy is in the highest degree a philosophy of reaction with respect to all scientific and industrial progress. It is that of a peasant who has made a praiseworthy effort to understand and to practise primitive Christianity under its rudimentary form of love for humanity. It has ignored social evolution and the craving for justice, which is affirmed with increasing energy in the conscience of the humblest. 1 1 8. Consequences of Non-resistance to Evil: The dogma of non-resistance to evil is, no doubt, that against which our natural tendencies most vigorously protest. We might renounce industrial progress to the benefit of our lives, and renounce it the more easily, inasmuch as, since our needs increase with the resources that are necessary for their satis- faction, we are not really more happy from the material point of view than men would be who live the frugal life of the fields. But we cannot give up scientific and artistic progress, which affords an ever- increasing satisfaction to our insatiable desire to know and to feel. It is not in man's nature to be temperate in the acquisition of knowledge as he is temperate in food ^ Tolstoi, Pensies choisies^ par Ossip Louri^, pp. 108- 112. NON-RESISTANCE TO EVIL. 245 or drink. Intellectual pleasures differ from the pleasures due to the satisfaction of the nutritive and sexual instincts, inasmuch as one is never tired of them, and they do not arise so much from the periodical satisfaction of needs that are being periodically re-awakened, as from a sustained interest and a permanent tendency which is never weakened. Intellectual pleasures, therefore, constitute a benefit due to civilisation — a benefit we expect to increase as civilisation progresses. The cause of civilisation must be defended against every factor of reaction. It is not so much our individual rights as the rights of humanity that must be safeguarded against those who, being in the midst of humanity, might disregard them. Non-resistance to evil would have taught our ancestors submissive resignation to the worst type of brigandage ; it would have placed inferior races in complete subjection to superior races, and thus would have irrepaf ably compromised the future of humanity. No doubt we may try to substitute a state of peace for a state of war, we may try to substitute an entente cordiale and reciprocal good feeling for the violent claiming of rights which are too strictly enforced by some to the detriment of others. Man tends to have less recourse to violence, and to substitute arguments for blows, as he becomes more civilised, more fit to use his reason. Violence is bad, both because its triumph is often opposed to reason and because with the appeal to violence evil is multiplied. But blind love and the renunciation of rights are not without dangers. In many cases to give up a right is to make it im- 246 THE SOCIAL IDEAL. possible to accomplish a duty. The man who is so fond of his fellows that he does not wish to cause them pain, will be found in many circumstances to be compelled to cause pain to one person in order not to cause it to another, and if he abstains from action he may cause pain to both. If he must choose between the pain he will give to his wife, or his son, or his brother, and the pain which he may give to one of his fellow-creatures — perhaps almost unknown to him — ^will he not be violating his family duties if he prefers the happiness of the un- known to the happiness of his relative, although charity may perhaps command him to serve the interests of the unknown and to sacrifice those nearest and dearest to him ? To abstain from criticism is to abstain from con- flict; it is to give up what perhaps is the finest element in human activity — the struggle for what one considers to be good, the defence of the good against the evil. Such renunciation must be due to fundamental apathy or to great discouragement. At a time when it is so difficult to practise tolerance, Tolstoi comes and asks us to carry to an extreme a virtue which we barely possess. And then, when we want so many different stimuli to move us to action, Tolstoi takes them away from us and asks us to regard life with the eyes of a man who is dying. In fact, the man who is dying is the only man who has not to take thought for the morrow, who may be called upon to return good for evil, for he need not trouble himself to know whether in acting thus he is favouring the evil at the expense of the good, and injuring the cause which he professes to serve. Or rather, he is no longer serving any cause; his THE NECESSITY OF CONFLICT. 247 detachment from the things of this world is complete. He thinks of nothing more but how to lead a holy life, such as one would lead in a world of good will. 119. The Necessity of Conflict Unfortunately, perhaps, the man who wishes to live, and whose philosophy is, to use the expression of Spinoza, a meditation on life rather than a medita- tion on death, ought to prepare himself for triumph and to assure the triumph of his cause. From the moral point of view, the important thing is that his cause shall be a good one. From the psycho-socio- logical point of view, the inevitable thing is that he is serving a cause, and that he is exercising on himself and others an inhibitive power, the r61e of which is at least as considerable as that of positive activity. Nietzsche has therefore taken human nature and social requirements into fuller account than Tolstoi has done, if, that is to say, Tolstoi has really attempted to take them into account at all. The morality of full vital expansion, which is exactly the same as Guyau's, has been correctly brought into relation with that of the Uebermensch, a morality which only aspires to give life its full significance, and which is the enemy of all mysticism and pessimism.^ " Above all," says Nietzsche, " you must see with your own eyes where there is always the most in- justice, that is to say, where life has its meanest, most restricted, most impoverished, and most rudi- mentary development, and where it can do nothing but take itself as the end and measure of things, * " The cancer," as Nietzsche says, ** of the old ideals and heroes of fiction," p. 13. Preface to McnschlicheSy AlhumcnschlkHs^ 248 THE SOCIAL IDEAL. where it can only grumble, and in a secret, petty, and assiduous manner, question, from the love of self- preservation, what is noblest, greatest, and richest — you must see with your own eyes the problem of hierarchy, and the way in which power, justice, and width of perspective increase in proportion as we become elevated."^ But if Guyau tells us to live with the utmost possible intensity, Nietzsche adds: — Live in your own way the higher life you have chosen; be your own judge and a free man; be a creator of values by establishing at first in your own mind a hierarchy of social values, as you understand them, by realising them afterwards in the face of every obstacle, by throwing into subjec- tion the low herd of the humble who cannot determine for themselves, and by entering into conflict with other free men, your equals, who are likewise creators of values. 120. Despotism. "You must become your own master, the master of your own virtues. Once they were your masters, but they have no right to be anything but your tools on a par with other tools." ^ The Ueber- mensch, then, is above the moral law; it is he who makes the law; upon him, a new Leviathan, depends the conception that the whole of a faithful people forms for itself of good and evil, of virtue and vice. The subjective nature of moral ideas is thus clearly proclaimed, and the most surprising part about it is that their subjectivity does not lead us to moral anarchy. M. Fouill^e, asserting that doubt is possible * 0/>, cit.. Part I. Preface, p. 15. '^ Op, a'L, p. 14. DESPOTISM. 249 as to the real hierarchy of the good, concludes there- from a wide tolerance, a perhaps excessive extension of the rights of the individual in matters of belief and action. The French philosopher even extracts quite a system of morality from this rather negative principle. When in doubt, abstain.^ In it he sees the origin of individual right, of liberty, of moral respect, and therefore of duty. Max Stirner^ (Caspar Schmidt) exaggerates these consequences of subjectivism, so far that he will have nothing to do with liberty that is granted. True liberty, he says, is what is taken. And thereby he closely approaches the conception of Nietzsche, for admitting no master, no law, nothing superior to the individual, he advises his hero to "desecrate" everything that religion and morality have consecrated; to have none of the prejudices of his age, none of the weaknesses of his so-called fellow-creatures with respect to civilisation, the State, the Church, the city, and the family. The individual, like the Uebermensch, makes his own law, and treats other men not as ends, but as means and instruments.^ The views of Nietzsche are more complete than those of Stirner, so far as politics are concerned. Those of the latter lead to anarchy; those of the former to a narrow subordination of the inferior to the superior caste, of the plebs to the nobility, through the clergy, army, and government. The classical conception, notably that of Plato, thus finds in ^ But cf. " Les concessions k I'absurde . . . peuvent etre parfois n^cessaires," etc. Fouillee, La Morale de Guyau^ chap. viii. p. 180. — Tr. ^ Der Einzige utid sein Eigenthum. Leipzig, 1845. ' Zenker, Anarchism^ chap. iii. — Tr. 250 THE SOCIAL IDEAL. one of our contemporaries a new interpreter, but with this difference,, that while Plato believed in an objective ideal, and a world of Ideas serving as a model for the wise man, the simple instrument of divinity, Nietzsche wants his wise man to be really an original legislator and creator. It is no longer, then, the Good Shepherd, the representative of God on earth, whom he proposes for our veneration; he gives the whole direction of life to the aristocracy formed by independent thinkers, not because they are wise, learned, and prudent, but because they are strong and audacious, and because their will is brutally imposed and becomes law. To the question that is so often asked — whether might is right — Nietzsche replies with Hobbes and Spinoza that might is the source of right.^ "Justice originates among men of almost equal power. Where there is no power clearly recognised as predominant, and where conflict would only cause reciprocal and futile injury, we have the origin of the idea of discussion and agreement on the claims of both sides. The character of the exchange is the initial character of justice. . . . Justice is a com- pensation and an exchange on the hypothesis of almost equal power." 2 Here, then, is clearly ex- pressed the thesis of right based on might and the reciprocal neutralisation of contrary forces. " Unus- quisque tantum juris habet quantum potentia valet." Nothing is more disconcerting to the reason, unless we admit the Spinozist doctrine which gives power to a being in proportion to his rational value. * Vide Austin, Jurisprudence , pp. 272 et seq.y Note v., p. 284, Lecture vi., and cf. Prince Kropotkin, Mutual A id^ pp. 76-78. — Tr. ^ MenschiicheSt Alhumenschliches, THE MEEK. 25I But the might that was in Spinoza's mind differs totally from brute force as conceived by Nietzsche. The former can never be overcome unless it is reason- able that it really should be suppressed; the latter can always be suppressed by a bhnder, more irrational, and still more brutal force. And it is exactly this oppression vof intelligence by a brute force, of reasonable man by an unreasonable brute, which is hateful to us, and revolts our tendency to the subordination of the unintelligent to the intelligent. That is why we seek for the law another foundation than violence or the equilibrium of forces which are ready to break out into mutual strife. 121. The Meek. It may well be that those who physically were the weakest may have had from time to time in greater measure than the strong the desire of seeing morality and law opposed to violence. Is that a reason for claiming that the theoretical rather than the practi- cal realisation of their desire has endowed us with a " morality of slaves," satisfactory only to the meek, to those with feeble will, and to characters of inferior temper ? Slaves really servile have never had the slightest tendency to contrast their rights as men with the power of their master. True slaves are those whom Aristotle so admirably depicts,^ happy in their servility, with no depth of thought, no inclination for the life of free men, ever requiring to be guided, sustained, and ruled. Nietzsche perhaps was not wrong in his desire * Cf. Politics^ vol. i. pp. 5, 13; Economics y I. 5.^Tr. 252 THE SOCIAL IDEAL. that masters should provide for the happiness of these servile souls by maintaining them in obedience, and imposing upon them the conceptions of free men. There is surely some exaggeration in the conception, born with Christianity and developed by the success of modern democracy, of a humanity in which all individuals have equal rights, equal aptitudes for self-government and for the determina- tion of the destinies of all. Ideas of equality, although they appear generous, are sometimes Utopian; and, in fact, we see in the most demo- cratic masses a real subordination of those whose minds are servile and whose intellect is feeble, to those who lead them, whether by right or by sheer audacity. Demagogic manners and morals are not likely to give to lofty spirits lasting and deep tendencies to an effective recognition of the equal rights of all men. They betray too much hatred in the many with respect to the limited and selected few, too much levelling down in spite of considerable in- equalities, and they incessantly make us dread a regression of humanity towards the forms of inferior civilisation, for what dominates and most easily directs the crowd is what flatters the meanest instincts of the multitude. And it is in this way that aristocratic tendencies arise in superior minds through a reaction which, perhaps, is instinctive, but to which reflection and reason give both foundation and support. The Christian ethics which loom so large in the eyes of the meek and the poor in spirit lack moderation in their glorification of the inferior man. It has rightly recalled to each of us his duty of humility, and has changed instinctive THE ARISTOCRACY. 253 and spontaneous sympathy into love, into a senti- ment of fraternity which surpasses the bounds of the city or the State, and which is lavished on the whole of humanity. The exaltation of the natural love of the animal for his congeners, of man for his fellows, cannot be lightly blamed; but there is another human sentiment, a sentiment too elevated to appear in the brute creation, and one which it seems quite lawful to develop — that of respect for worth, of respect increasing with worth in pro- portion as the stages of a social hierarchy are ascended. 122. The Aristocracy, If man had not been led by his nature to consider in different pleasures and in different forms of good the objects of his desires, so many stages in a hierarchy of values, he would have never deliberated, never have chosen, never have willed ; if pleasures had only presented to him quantitative differences, he would only have tried to accumulate them, and to juxtapose them one with another in the course of his existence. But, in reality, the idea of the best has been from all time the directing idea of his conduct, even when his appreciation has been at fault. Social evolution shows us the considerable r61e played by this idea of the best in the organisation of common life. There is no State without a hierarchy; nowhere is the crowd homogeneous, everywhere are chiefs, more or less temporary, elected or hereditary, springing from the ranks of the people or from a caste closed to the multitude; even in our own days and in countries with demo- 254 THE SOCIAL IDEAL. cratic customs there are governing classes and other classes which aspire to become the governing class. These are commonplaces of history and observation. At all times and at all places there has therefore been a social hierarchy, and the effective sovereignty of the strongest proceeds in most cases from what has been considered, from a given point of view, the best. This point of view varies: here it is the best soldiers, there the best orators, elsewhere the best merchants, the notable manufacturers or land- owners; but everywhere it is the men who occupy, or are considered to occupy, the summit of a scale of social values. Nietzsche recjuires the masters to be those who have established this scale of values, and who have imposed it upon the popular credulity; but history shows that the scale of social values is prior to the conception held of them by the men who are at the summit. Napoleon could only create a factitious nobility, an ephemeral hierarchy, although he reached the summit of human greatness. The will of a man, however powerful he may be, does not very deeply modify the tendencies of the multitude. The hypno- tised crowd may for a moment follow its magnetiser, but the hypnosis is of short duration, and the suc- cesses of the Uebermensch are ephemeral. The social evolution is not at the mercy of the caprice of genius; very rarely indeed are the tastes of genius those of the crowd; the hierarchy of values admitted by men of talent and science is not that admitted by the people. Is it necessary to remember that the mail of genius, the saint, the prophet, the man inspired, the tribune, affect social evolution only in so far as they are THE ARISTOCRACY. 255 products of that evolution ; and that, so to speak, they are inserted in a series of factors of the col- lective future, not to oppose the other forces, but to accelerate their action, and precipitate or retard events according to circumstances ? Is it necessary to repeat once more how simple is hero-worship, and how powerless is ev^n the strongest human will to modify the natural course of events? If Socrates, Jesus, and Mahomet had not made their appear- ance at the "psychological" moment, would they not have been considered by posterity as visionaries, madmen, or at least as eccentric ? Because they had a place marked out in advance for them at the very centre of events, and because their influence radiated over a part of the world, each was a Uebermensch, not because humanity responded to his appeal, but because he in some measure responded to the appeal of humanity. And so, when Nietzsche asks us to recognise as the supreme ideal his hero, the creator of a scale of values, his suggestion is impossible : it is contrary to the teaching of sociology and history.' Individuals do not modify their environment so much as their environment modifies and governs them. The freest man, the man who is most deter- mined to act according to his own whim, is still, in spite of it, unconsciously a product of his own age and of his own country. He unconsciously obeys collective tendencies and common prejudices against which he often cannot react because he does not suspect their existence. 256 THE SOCIAL IDEAL. 123. Importance of the Theory of Rights, The morality of Nietzsche is as unacceptable as that of Tolstoi ; both are too much a priori — the one a morality of abnegation, the other a morality of might. Both abnegation and might only have moral value according as they either of them serve a superior and well-defined interest. Renunciation for the sake of renunciation, and might for the sake of might, are not the mark of a reasonable being. We must know how to sacrifice ourselves, or how to strive for a social ideal. Nietzsche's Uebermensch could only become a moral being by agreeing to ful- fil duties corresponding to his power; he had not so much to create a hierarchy of values as to subordinate the order of social values to the order of social duties. It is, in fact, on the theory of the rights of each individual in society that the doctrines of Nietzsche and Tolstoi come into their most radical conflict; here both lack a solid foundation. This fact is a sign of the importance which we should attach to the organisation of individual and collective rights in the ideal society. THE FOUNDATION OF RIGHTS. 257 IV. Rights. 124. The Foundation of Rights} Liberty, in the positive sense of the word, is Right. We have not the liberty to dispose of what we have the right to possess; we have only the liberty to do what we have the right to do; all other liberty is only provisional, precarious, and is not moral because it cannot be claimed. The increase of liberty ob- tained in the course of evolution is therefore an increase of individual rights. But on what founda- tion do these rights rest ? Are they simply granted by the community to the individual, by an arbitrary decision of the State, or of the power acting in the name of the community ? If they are granted with- out due reason, they may be taken away again, even if consecrated by usage. No doubt "customary right" is of the importance that the "historical school" has thrown into such bold relief. Rights which result from morals, from local or district customs, consecrated by the social consciousness which has maintained them for numerous genera- tions, notwithstanding variations and fluctuations of different kinds, run the least chance of abolition ; but we discovered in 1789 that they are not protected during revolutionary movements. We can hardly expect rights founded on fact to be maintained except by force; but force, however great it may be, cannot be assured of indefinite ^ Austin, op. cit,f Lecture XVL, pp. 393 ei seq, — Tr. 17 258 RIGHTS. supremacy; and besides, as Spinoza pointed out, there is no individual force which will not be inferior to social power. 125. Natural Right} But it has been claimed that there are natural, inalienable, imprescriptible rights, although they are often misunderstood. Such, at the time of the Re- volution, was the theory which was inspired in parti- cular by J. J. Rousseau. Man is born free — that is to say, he has all rights, and the only limit set to these rights is the requirement of respect for the liberty of others. If each of us has not unlimited rights, it is because he is not alone in an unlimited world. It is because of the limitations of property and the multiplicity of free beings that the rights which each of us holds from nature are restricted by life in society. Slavery and despotism have been condemned in the name of these so-called natural rights. But, as a matter of fact, the right of nature rests upon the hypothesis of a metaphysical liberty. This liberty may be disputed, for all metaphysical entities have no well-established objective reality, and men in general will always be tempted to ignore such liberty, because for the most part they cannot even imagine it. To affirm a natural right is to presume to lay down rights a priori, and nothing is more dangerous in politics, nothing is more contrary to the scientific spirit. If our practical conceptions must depend on the highest conception of all — that of a social state that ^ Austin, op, cit,t pp. 344 et seg. — Tr. RIGHTS OF SOCIAL FUNCTION. 259 we are obliged to realise in common, ought not the idea of our rights to flow from that of our social duties ? 126. Metaphysical Right and Dignity. The Kantians admit the co-relation of rights and duties, and the priority of the notion of duty to every other moral notion; but they generally make the rights of a man depend on the duties that other men have towards him, and notably on the fundamental duty of respecting "eminent human dignity" at all times, in all places, however miserable the bearer of the moral law may be in other respects.^ Now we know that this "eminent dignity" of which Kant speaks has its apparent reason in the power of duty, and its real reason in the "noble source and the noble origin" of moral obligation, Liberty, the ratio essendi of duty. So that we are brought by a detour to rights founded on metaphysical liberty. And as the liberty of each is not precisely fixed, the limitation of individual rights, one by the other, becomes rather a question of fact than a question of morality. It follows that in reality there is in such a doctrine no principle for the effective determination of the rights of each. Besides, in the eyes of Kant moral obliga- tion is indeterminate; therefore the right which is its correlative is none the less so.^ 127. Rights of Social Function. That it may be enforced is generally considered as the characteristic of a right. The idea of justice is ^ Cf. Austin, op, cit., pp. 285, 712.— Tr. 2 Austin, op. cit., p. 713,— Tr. 26o RIGHTS. closely connected with the idea of legal restraint and penal enactment. I possess a right. Then you must all respect it; That is the current formula. Looking closer, we see that the right is a consequence, an effect and not a cause; that most of the rights that we claim to have respected are not connected with the person, but with the social function that the person is sup- posed to fulfil, so that if he does not fulfil the function well he has partially forfeited his powers and his liberties. Nq doubt there are certain rights common to all men, and attached to the human person in general ; but it is worth noting that they are connected with generous impulses, charity, and human solidarity; so that if honourable men could not agree to fulfil what have been called "wide duties," most of the rights of man, qua man, could not be exercised, and would not effectively exist.^ It is out of " humanity" that we concede to the wretched the right to be pitied and consoled for their misfortunes. But the right to the free expression of his thought, for instance, really only belongs to the citizen who accepts the obligation of not creating disturbance in the State by his wild speeches. Liberty of con- science is not a right of man, qua man, it is a right of the ripened man who has reached a sufficient degree of intelligence and reason, and is capable of fulfilling his duties as a good citizen. It would therefore be important at the outset to have an exact idea of the totality of our social obligations. They are in fact of three types — those imposed upon us by laws or morals, those which result from our ^ " Duty the basis of right," Austin, op, city p. 395.— Tr. RIGHTS OF SOCIAL FUNCTION. 26 1 functions, and those which are derived from our contracts. We have already seen that those which are im- posed upon us by laws or customs are so intimately connected with those which result from our functions that we can scarcely trace a line of demarcation between the two domains. Every man may consider himself as a function of the social state in which he lives, and his activity as a function of the complete social activity. There is there- fore no reason for drawing a lasting distinction between the rights of the citizen in general and the rights of the citizen performing a public func- tion ; the two groups can be united in one, that of the citizen fulfilling under every circumstance his social function. As for the rights which result from the contracts between individuals, they are very clearly derived from the obligations that at least two individuals accept who become "functions" one of the other. In every contract we only acquire rights over others because of our reciprocal duties. It is easily seen that the rights which issue from contract are very varied, and that they do not depend on a moral theory except in so far as they depend on the theory of contract in general. Now the latter, as we have already seen, is subordinate in fact to the more general right that the State claims for itself, to put a check to the liberty of the dontracting parties, by obliging them under pain of judicial nullity to observe forms which are more and more rigorously deter- mined. The problem of the right to contract thus raises the problem of the rights of the State over its citizens. But that brings us to the question of the 262 RIGHTS. foundation of rights anterior to all contract, rights founded on the exercise of a social function. Evolution seems to sanction the increase of im- portance and independence of the individual in pro- portion as the division of social labour makes him a more appreciable factor in the common prosperity. History shows that aptitude to possess and to act freely increases with the aptitude to perform obliga- tions corresponding to conceded rights. Under the feudal system the lord had many rights, because, theoretically at least, he had many duties. "Until 1789 the eldest son in France possessed all the family property, because he had all kinds of obliga- tions towards his brothers and sisters. Everywhere an exact correspondence tends to be established between rights or powers conceded and obligations imposed. Real equity appears more and more to consist in the inequality of benefits corresponding to the inequality of charges. 128. Justice and Devotion. And so we are led more and more to feel how complex a thing is justice. " Neither the mathema- tical idea of equality," says M. Tanon, " nor that of proportion, of equivalence, and of reciprocity, nor the idea of harmony and beauty, nor that of the identity and agreement of thought with itself, nor even the wider idea of solidarity — each and all of which enter in some measure into the idea of justice — is its only source; they do not suffice to exhaust its rich and varied content, nor to respond to the warmth, diversity, and force of sentiment that its evocation awakens in the minds of men." JUSTICE AND CHARITY. ^63 This is because an equitable distribution of rights implies, as we have just seen, a preliminary equitable distribution of duties, and this apportionment on the one hand can only take place in virtue of a general conception of the social system, and on the other hand can only be imposed entirely from without on individuals whose good-will is indisputably a factor of the highest importance.^ Obligations which are incumbent upon each of us must certainly not only be accepted, but must be spontaneously sought by the really moral being, to whom we give considerable liberty and initiative. According to the precept, "you can, and therefore you must," the best men feel themselves morally obliged to perform the highest functions that they are capable of performing ; and that is why we find at the base of social justice the generous impulse of the man who loves his fellow-creatures, and who works with a relative disinterestedness for the common happiness. It is thus that we find socia- bility and goodwill. 129. Justice and Charity? Those who have tried to draw a distinction be- tween justice and charity are therefore quite wrong. The sentiments of sociability, and, in particular, the love of others, the generous desire for expansion and well-doing, are the most efficacious motives of deter- mination by which a man agrees to fulfil obligations, or effectively decides to fulfil them. If in the ^ On the Monadistic and Monistic Views of Justice, vide Mackenzie, Social Philosophy ^ p. 134. — Tr. 2 Cf, Mackenzie, op, ciL, p. 265.— Tr. ,264 RIGHTS. primitive forms of social existence the constraint exercised by the collectivity on the individual has played the largest part, we need not therefore believe that this constraint has had to break down effective resistances such as the selfishness developed by re- flection or the struggle for existence. Constraint was always exercised in view of a kind of discipline of the activity, but there was in the primitive social organism, as in the animal organism from its birth, a spontaneous activity, and the spon- taneity of the social elements was all in favour of altruistic actions. This was for a twofold reason : in the first place, because selfishness implies reflection on the self, on its own value, and a differentiation of the individuals which thus have different ends and tendencies; and secondly, because the collective senti- ments and tendencies, in view of common ends, in consideration of the common good, were originally preponderant in the individual consciousness. Voluntary immolation, the spontaneous sacrifice of personal advantages, and often of life itself, to the interests of the tribe, are proofs of this.^ The primitive subordination of individual to social ends, and therefore the fundamental disinterestedness of human nature, seems to us to be established by the indisputable predominance of sympathetic mani- festations in the particular course of action of isolated beings. Primitive man has not yet the prejudice of his "eminent personal dignity"; he sees, less for himself than for the whole in the midst of which he does not yet clearly distinguish himself. If therefore he has no merit in being generous, it is equally true that he cannot be the subject of rational approbation ^ Prince Kropotkin, op, cii,, passim. — Tr. JUSTICE AND CHARITY. 265 or disapprobation on account of his unreflecting generosity. This generosity is not synonymous with charity: charity implies a clearer consciousness of the moral value of individuals, and a keener desire for the perfection of others. But it has both the spon- taneity of the charitable impulse and the specific character of love. The r61e of the reason and of custom is to regulate further the sometimes capricious course of natural generosity, and for that purpose to provide at the outset against whatever excess may appear in certain impulses. Exactly because liberty of action is re- strained, charity cannot manifest itself in all directions. The individual learns to exercise over himself a kind of check, and justice springs from a twofold inhibitive power, one external and the other internal, when increasing individualism involves the selfish consideration of rights. The being, until then devoted to the interests of the community, reflects on his own interests, contrasts the latter with the former, and claims from others the respect due to his rights, while for the first time he recognises in an explicit manner the rights of his fellows to receive from him the services that he formerly rendered them spontaneously. The law consecrates this evolution of the general conscience, and recognises that respect for certain of the most general rights may be claimed if need be by force ; while respect for other and more vari- able and disputable rights is not guaranteed by it. Hence the distinction which has played its part in classical morality, between ** strict duties '* or justice, and "wide duties** or charity; as if the accomplish- 266 RIGHTS. ment of certain obligations could be, from the moral point of view, more or less obligatory; as if one could discuss with one's conscience and reason the degree of the moral necessity of certain acts. It should be understood that the distinction is drawn between duties that may be required under all circumstances, and duties which are imposed only under certain conditions ; but the latter would none the less be duties as imperative as the others, at certain times, and in certain determinate places. It is objected that the duties of charity are dictated by the heart ; but we have just shown that generosity is the common source of all duties, and we cannot admit that because an impulse of the heart has become a prescription of the reason and the law, it differs fundamentally from the impulse of the heart which may become a prescription of the reason, without being for a very long time to come a prescription of the law. And further, the generous impulses, which alone are ratified by reflection, have a moral value; in a well-organised society every- thing that reason and generosity combined require the law must tend to demand, in order that the domain of legal obligations and the domains of social and moral obligations may exactly correspond, since there is no reason for their being fundamentally distinct. To sum up: the origin of rights is the same as that of duties. All rights and all duties are of the same moral importance, and a being possesses no rights but those which he holds directly or indirectly from the obligations which are incumbent on him, either from a social obligation determined by custom and natural evolution, or by his spontaneity as a moral THE RIGHT OF PROPERTY. 267 being, considering labour at the common task as a duty in proportion to his strength, his capacity, and his natural or acquired aptitudes. And so, not being able to claim liberties and possessions except in so far as we claim obligations compelling those liberties and possessions, we have an exact idea of our rights from the exact idea of the duties which we consent to fulfil. 130. The Right of Property.^ No right is more interesting than the right of property. By what has been just said this right is the free disposition of suitable means for the fulfilling of a duty. To what duty corresponds what has been called " the right of the first occupant " ? This so- called right is that of the chiefs who have divided among themselves a territory; that of the farmers, shepherds, V hunters, fishers, who have taken posses- sion of a more or less vast tract of soil ; that of the nations who occupy by means of their explorers uncultivated and uninhabited territories. It is not enough to say, as the Kantians^ and individualists in general seem too prone to affirm, that in taking possession of property, the possession of which is undisputed, we harm no one, we injure no other person's right, and we only use our personal right to extend the dependencies of one's ego as far as is possible without injuring the liberty of others. The absence of competition is a negative condition. It does not found a right. It is not the same as the ^ Spencer, Principles of Sociology^ chap, xv.; Austin, op, di,,p. 847; Maine, Ancient Law , pp. 244-304. — Tr. ^ Cf. Austin, op, cit.f pp. 940 et seq. — Tr. a68 RIGHTS. duty that we assume when we take possession of a piece of land, or when we take possession of a piece of flint which can be made into an axe — the duty to use it with the view of giving value to a piece of natural property, to draw from it a profit for oneself and for others, for one's own cause and for the cause of civilisation, to make of it, in short, a means of work. The obligation that we agree to fulfil, in the absence of any other man who claims to fulfil it better or as well, incontestably gives a right which can be affirmed by resistance against any one who may wish to expropriate the first occupant. But this resistance has necessarily its limits. For if there appears an individual or a community capable of making the soil or the tool yield more for the good of all than the first occupier can obtain from it, his right is, so to speak, superseded by theirs. In organ- ised society we see that under such circumstances an expropriation takes place, requiring legal forms at first, and a legal indemnity afterwards. This duty is consecrated by the " Declaration of the Rights of Man," when it asserts that "property being an inviolable and sacred right, no one can be deprived of it, save when public necessity, legally established, evidently demands it, and then only with the consent of a just and previously determined indemnity." It is not always a rigorously inviolable property which may be taken from its possessor without indemnity; and that is exactly why, for the expropriation to be just, the right of possession must be essentially based on a duty of setting a value on the duty of labour, in the wide sense of the word. And it is this same duty which enables us to con- ceive of possession as lawful — that is to say, the free THE SHARE OF THE COMMUNITY. 269 disposition of the tools of labour. We want every man to fulfil his function, and we ought therefore to leave him the power of using at his own convenience thdse tools or raw materials which are indispensable to him for that purpose. 131. The Share of the Community. Can we say, for instance, that the possession of a machine can ever be absolute property? That machine represents a large number of inventions which constitute a social property, a collective capital. This machine could not have been con- structed without the co-operation of a large number of citizens who have run risks, have shown devotion and skill, and these are things which are not paid for; the possessor of this instrument of labour is therefore indebted much more than is generally sup- posed to society, to the community, for that property which he claims to be his own, but which is rather a part of the public property placed in his hands. And so it is with landed property. The field that you say is yours, and that you surround with so much care by high walls or strong hedges, owes the greatest part of its value to the roads which are near it, and which the community has built and main- tained, to the railways which enable you to bring to it the agricultural machines which are necessary for proper cultivation ; it owes its fertility to processes that you did not invent, to tools that you did not create, and to the multitude of means which you owe to society, much more than to your own labour. Hence the fruit that you reap is not absolutely your own. Labour in the sense of personal activity 270 RIGHTS. cannot therefore, as many moralists and politicians ! maintain, found an absolute right of property. " Labour," says M. Renouvier,^ " gives as it were to the result obtained an individual consecration, a seal of personality which adds to the proprietary character of an object used for the first time and necessary to life." * It is an exaggeration of the scope of the rights of the individual to the detriment of the rights of the community, whose services and preponderating share in private activity we are far too apt easily to forget. We do not work for our- selves alone ; we work for the whole of society ; we do our share of collective work, and we may there- fore be the less disinterested in that work in propor- tion as division of labour is more advanced. 132. Property and Reform. But we work qud individuals capable of reform and of intelligent and free activity; we are not machines, and the dignity of the reasonable being can only be safeguarded if we leave to the worker liberty, free disposition, and property in his means of action. Let the worker become less and less a machine, an automaton, acting on others and with others; this will make desirable the principle already laid down of an increase of individual liberty. Property in the fruits of labour is less imposed than that in the instruments of labour. No doubt it is quite fair that each should enjoy advantages proportionate to his work; but it is equally fair that each should receive means of action proportional to his value, to his capacities or apti- ^ Sc, de la Morale, vol. iL p. 12, HEREDITARY TRANSMISSION OF PROPERTY. 27I tudes, to the importance of the duties that it is reasonable for him to attempt to fulfil. Property in certain means of action, such as land, machinery, or tools, is further based on a foundation, though slightly different, yet at least as well assured as that of the individual possession of the fruits of labour, or of the money which is the customary equivalent. The right of individual property is therefore estab- lished for all beings without distinction. The in- equality of the rights of property is equally well established. On the one hand, let us give to each according to his proved aptitudes, capacity, and activity; on the other hand, according to his merits. It would be absurd to grant the free disposition of considerable property to an idiot or to a being incapable of useful social work. It is therefore the duty of society to work without relaxation at the just redivision of material property. It must endeavour to procure property for all, and to those who can render the greatest services to society it should guarantee the possession of sufficient re- sources. The right to labour, which was so ill-con- ceived in 1848, when it led to the creation of national workshops, is also the right to property.^ 133. The Hereditary Transmission of Property, Is not the right of hereditary possession an obstacle to the fair redivision of the means of labour which constitute property par excellence ? On what founda- tion can be based the hereditary transmission of property, if not on the duty of the preceding genera- tion to secure for its successor, family by family, the ' Mackenzie, op, ci/., pp. 268 ei seq. 272 RIGHTS. resources that are necessary for the accomplishment of a social work which is ever becoming more complex and more elevated ? If inheritance of property has as its aim to ensure to descendants happiness in idleness, it must be con- demned as contrary to the first duty of the citizen, which is action, the production of property destined to secure to society a continual increase of the happi- ness of all. Morality, therefore, cannot justify the hereditary transmission of wealth which, when mis- placed, serves no longer as a means of labour. It cannot approve of the accumulation in a few hands of enormous capital, which permits of idleness and vice, without involving corresponding obligations. On this point as on all others it is therefore neces- sary to regularise the course of the social future, in order to prevent enormous rights of property from existing without the acceptance by the possessor, or the imposition upon him, of corresponding social duties. It is not a question of entirely suppressing the right of the hereditary transmission of property, although this right does not repose, as has been said, on an absolute right of the testators to do with their fortune what pleases them, or on the duty of respect- ing the will of a deceased proprietor. There is no absolute property; the individual only possesses by a delegation, so to speak, made to him by society of a certain quantity of means of action. But this delegation naturally persists when the reasons which at first determined it still persist, and when in the children are to be found aptitudes at least equivalent to those of their parents. Hereditary transmission had its raison d'etre under the ancient regime, when the inheritance of pro- HEREDITARY TRANSMISSION OF PROPERTY. 273 fessions, posts, and offices involved the inheritance of the means. It has its raison d'etre again as the importance of professional inheritance decreases ; for if the parents of the old regime were preoccupied in preserving or buying for their children posts and dignities, the parents of to-day are occupied in assuring to their sons or daughters not titles but aptitudes, not places but functions, in which they will have to display intelligence, sensibility, activity, and talent; and therefore the more right the fathers of other days had of leaving to their children the means of triumphing over difficulties which are always reappearing, the more that duty rests upon the fathers of to-day.^ The solidarity of successive generations is thus formed in the family in a moral manner, on condition that it has as its end virtue and not inaction. The solidarity of the members of the same com- munity may be affirmed in the same way, and from it results the right of bequest, which is a correlative of the duty of social education. But it is easily understood that as this duty, may under many cir- cumstances be misinterpreted, the right of bequest ought to be limited and controlled in order that the intentions of testators may never be in conflict, and may never issue in results contrary to those just arrangements which are made by society to secure an equitable redivision of the means of action among all individuals. If a right considered as absolutely inviolable, such as the right of property, may thus be limited by the exercise of collective action, we see that all other ^ ** For the Effect of the Abolition of Inheritance upon Culture," etc., vide Mackenzie, op. aV., p. 272. — Tr. 18 274 THE STATE. rights have only a relative value, and may undergo incessant fluctuations; and that their extension depends, at least as far as the rights of the individual are concerned, on the increase of the personal value, of the value that the Kantians take as absolute, but which is being ever increased by the unceasing development of human intelligence and industry. V. The State.^ 134. The Role of the State. We have just seen how close is the dependence, both in fact and in right, in which society holds the individual; in fact, although the social contract may have ceased to be the oppression of early ages, and in right, because society has duties to fulfil. No subject, then, can be of more importance to us at this stage in our investigations, than that of the determination of the powers of the State. In reality there is only one right that the State can exercise, that of legislation. It is that right which enables it to have ministers who are formed into a Government, and magistrates who are the interpreters of its sovereign will. The ideal law, being the prescription of reason itself, has ipso facto every right over man. If a man is only moral in obeying according to his nature as a reasonable being, he is only moral in obeying the law. But whence comes the right of the State to determine ' ^ **For Definitions of the State," cf. UoW^ndi, Jurisprudence ^ p. 40; Austin, op. cit., p. 242.— Tr. . THEORIES OF SOVEREIGNTY. 275 the law, and to impose upon the race its will and its decisions ? 135. Theories of Sovereignty} There are many theories of the sovereignty of the State. Aristotle, in the second chapter ^ of the third book of his Politics, attempts to justify the rule which requires that in a democracy the majority shall govern : — " That the supreme power should be lodged with the many may be satisfactorily explained, and although it may not be free from difficulties, it seems, however, to contain an element of truth." Among the Romans, the will of the prince had the force of law only because the people delegated to him full power .^ The principle of the sovereignty of the people is therefore maintained, although an individual may be considered as capable of as much wisdom as the many. But the Roman Church was not long before it contested the sovereignty of the State. Gregory VII. and St. Thomas Aquinas taught that the State is an accursed thing, or at least that its power is of purely human invention. The Church of God alone is the depositary of power; it alone is invested with the right of dictating laws to man.* Bodin,^ in his De Republica, admits as beyond dispute * Vide Austin, op, cU., pp. 220 ei seq.\ and for criticism of Austinian doctrine, z/iiflfe E. Robertson, Art. "Law," -£'«^y<:. Brit.^ xiv. p. 356. — Tr. 2 III., chap, xi.— Tr. ^ * * Cum populus ei et in eum omne imperium suum et potestatem concessit." /«j/., Bk. I. ii. 6. — ^Tr. * The Eternal Opposition of Revelation and Reason, * He defines the Sovereign part of the State as " Summa in cives cc subditos legibtisqtu soluta potestas , . . quam Graeci AKpaP i^ovaioPt Kvplav dpx^v, K^piov roKiTevfMt /tali Segnioriant appellant, ^^ Xfe Rep. i. 8»— Tr. 276 THE STATE. "the absolute and perpetual power of the republic"; in his mind its sovereignty is indivisible and inde- feasible. "Ea jura nee cedi, nee distrahi, nee ulla ratione alienari posse." Of all the rights of the sovereign (whether one or more) the principal is ** the power of giving laws to subjects without their consent." As early as 1609, Althusius, in his Politica methodice digesta, promulgates the theory of the sovereignty of the State as based on contract. The State is the last of a series of contracts, a series which first comprises the family, the corporation, the com- mune, and the province. Sovereignty is defined as the "highest and most general power of disposing of everything connected with the safety and the well-being of the soul and body of every member of the Republic."^ The people is the great political creator, the real "king-maker"; the force which concedes the power remains superior to the power it concedes. The people is immortal. It is there- fore the unique subject of a permanent power. Contract is rather implicit than explicit. If the interpretation placed upon it by the legislature is not in conformity with the will of the people, then the people have the right to depose the legislature. Grotius denies that the sovereignty of the people is inalienable; a nation may with its own consent be reduced to complete slavery .2 Hobbes^ declared that the people never did possess the supreme power before it gave itself a master; the act by which are established both sovereignty and the legislative ^ Politica^ chap. ix. 125. 2 Grotius, Dejure belli ac pacts (i. 3. 8; ii. 5, 31; 22, ii), vide Austin, op, ciLf p. 234. — Tr. ^ Cf. Austin, op, cil,, p. 235 ; HolIanJ, op, cit.y p. 45.-rTR. THEORIES OF SOVEREIGNTY. 277 power IS the contract by which the renunciation by individuals of all their rights was effected. Never was this idea more clearly expressed — that the State is something official, a " being of reason " on which all rights are conferred with a view to the general happiness and maintenance of peace among men. Having admitted that peace is the greatest good, the State having as its function this supreme good must dispose of all power. Locke does not admit that the State has an absolute sovereignty; each individual retains some liberty. To Rousseau the general will alone is the right will. The sovereignty of the people is inalienable and in- defeasible, but it cannot be exercised by delegation ; the general will is one and indivisible. " There is not, and there cannot be, any kind of fundamental law obligatory on the mass of the people, not even the social contract;"^ but this contract gives to the body politic absolute power over all its members.^ The historical school rejected the idea of the social contract, and made of the State a natural product of collective evolution. To Burke, Hugo, and Savigny,^ the power of the State was the result of tradition and custom. Kant did not admit the historic reality of the social contract, but in his opinion all real law must be such as it would have been if the general will had served as its basis. The idea of the absolute sovereignty of the popular will reappears clearly in the theory that the legislative power has all rights and no duties with respect to the citizens;* that ^ Contrat social^ i. 7. ^ Ibid., ii. 4. ^ Cf. Robertson, op, cit,, p. 363. — Tr. * Kant, CEuvres (edit. Rosenkranz), vi. 165. Cf. Thiorie dti Droit (1797). 278 THE STATE. there are no means of coercion which can be em- ployed against the sovereign, and therefore that no constitutional restriction or Hmitation can be made to the power of the monarch. As Mr. Merriam has remarked in his recent History of the Theory of Sovereignty since Rousseau,''^ Kant's doctrine of the power of the State is as absolute as that of Hobbes and Rousseau. Fichte admits a series of contracts by which property is progressively constituted, and by which protection, union, and subjection to the government are effected.^ This subjection has for its end the establishment of an authority capable of protecting the rights of the citizen, an authority which must be watched and which may be annihilated by a con- stitutional assembly. " In fact and in right, the people is the sovereign power, the source of all other power, and responsible to God alone." To Schel- ling, the State is the consummation of a cosmic process [which has for its aim the reconciliation of necessity and liberty, the realisation of an absolute will, "the immediate and visible type of absolute life." Schelling was one of the promoters of the movement in favour of the divine right of kings. In the opinion of many theorists on that right, the theory of the sovereignty of the people was, as De Bonald holds, a theory intimately connected with atheism and materialism. The supreme power can only come from God; the sovereign is the representa- tive of Providence, and his rights are as unlimited as those of God. Hegel conceived the State as a real personality ' Columbia University Press, 1 900. ^ Grundlage des NaturrechiSy 1 796-97. SUMMARY OF THE THEORIES. 279 having rights and duties.^ This being has "its foundation and cause in itself." It is a person moral to a higher degree than an individual. It is the sovereign person, which may find its expression in an individual, and which may be made objective in a king. The revolution of 1848 based sovereignty on reason, and recognised an absolute sovereignty in the "universality of the citizens." In 1832 Sis- mondi, agreeing with Lerminier, had said : " National reason is something much higher than public opinion." According to Pierre Leroux, "sovereignty is the power which descends from God into the human mind and is manifested in the people; that is to say, by the indivisible unity of all the citizens, the real image of Him from whom it flows." ^ Proudhon held that sovereign justice results from organisa- tion, and is a natural product of the constitution of the community, just as health is a resultant of the constitution of the animal. " It need only be explained and understood to be affirmed by all and to act;" to it " belongs the direction of power." ^ 136. Summary of the Theories. Such are the principal opinions advanced by the theorists with the object of legalising the rule of the State, whatever its representative may be — king, parliamentary assembly, popular assembly, elective body, hereditary nobility, etc. Three great theories disengage themselves from the whole. The first ^ Grundlinien des Philos, des Rechts (1821), sects. 35-36. ^ Projet d'une Constitution democratique (1848), art. 19. ' De la Justice dans la Revolution, i. 118. 28o THE STATE. bases the rights of the State on the rights of the Godhead ; the second, on the popular will, whether that will be or be not considered as illuminated by reason ; and the third, on that natural evolution which issues in the constitution of an organ or of a kind of judicial personality. The first of these great doctrines brings us to the legalisation of every arbitrary decision. When we entrust to a man, or to a privileged body, the duty of interpreting the divine commandments, or of making known the divine will and of substituting himself for Providence, we ought to trust blindly to this represen- tative of the Godhead. We implicitly confess our ignorance, our inability to know, our irremediable mental and moral weakness; we find ourselves in a flock for which we cannot even choose the shepherd. But by what sign are we to recognise the elect of God ? Here every criterion is at fault. That is to say the whole theory is wrong from its foundation. The second doctrine is really worth consideration only because — with Rousseau, Kant, Pierre Leroux, and Proudhon — the general will is represented as the most capable of right decision. But the obstacle is precisely the unsurmountable difficulty, so well pointed out by Rousseau, of realising the unanimity of the citizens. How can we disengage the " national reason " of which Sismondi speaks from "the public opinion, which, although in general far-seeing enough, is often rather precipitate, impulsive, and capricious " ? Where shall we find " this reason illuminated by all the intelligence, and animated by all the virtues which exist in the nation ? " SOVEREIGNTY AND THE SOCIAL CONTRACT. 281 137. Relative Sovereignty and the Social Contract. If we cannot find it, we must give up the theory of an absolute sovereignty, which could be only justified by an absolutely right will. We must admit a limited and incomplete sovereignty corre- sponding to the imperfect intelligence illuminating the State. Hence two conceptions are admissible: either the sovereignty is transferred from the nation to an elected king, responsible himself or through his ministers, who is the first organ of political life ; or, it is transferred to a picked body, whose mission is to decide in the name of all — to a Parliament formed of representatives of the whole country. In any case the organ created to take the place of the direct administration of the people by itself, the vicarious representative of the sovereign power, has never had, as Althusius, Locke, and Rousseau saw clearly enough, as many rights as the sovereign people itself, which grants to it all needful authority, but not absolute power. Thus there are grounds for placing limits on the rights of the State, contrary to the admission of Hobbes and Grotius in their desire to legalise the absolute power of the king, whom they frankly substituted for the true sovereign. But most of those who have admitted national sovereignty have believed in a social contract, im- plicit or explicit, and ipso facto they have given as a moral foundation to the authority of the State a kind of delegation made to it by individuals of a portion of their power and right. Neither Rousseau nor Kant believed that this contract has ever been realised ; they none the less considered the State as able to claim no authority other than that 282 THE STATE. of the individuals composing it. The opinion of M. Fouill^e does not sensibly differ from that of Kant, in the sense that while making of the social contract an ideal of spontaneous agreement with par- ticular wills, M. Fouill^e remains an individualist, and refuses to seek the raison d'etre of the whole any- where but in an artificial grouping of its elements. No doubt the force of the State must more and more be based on the agreement, the " synergy " of individual wills; but the existence of the State is assured in fact, and is legalised on other principles. At the beginning of human civilisation, social con- straint was sufficient to create a central power in every aggregate. As social constraint diminished, the permanent action of the State continued to make itself felt by individuals, as we have pointed out above, in spite of the progressive substitution of a contractual right for a purely repressive penal right. The more important the contract, the more the r61e of the State has increased from the judicial point of view, so true it is that legislative and con- tractual activity are entirely distinct. 138. Duties of the State. The existence of a legislative, executive, or judicial power does not then depend on the will of men ; the State is a natural product, a natural being, as op- posed to Hobbes' Leviathan, a monster imposed by reason. We thus come to the third of the great doctrines concerning the State which we mentioned above. No doubt it was not sufficient to say with the "historical school'' that traditions and customs DUTIES OF THE STATE. 283 confer political power, and determine the nature as well as the extent of the rights of the sovereign ; but it must be recognised that the evolution of the State has as much importance as the evolution of every other natural being. We must therefore not endeavour to conceive a priori a r6le and rights of which history will teach the future. Further, Hegel, by insisting on the moral value of the State, on its rights and its duties as well as on its supremacy, its independence, the priority of its power relatively to individual liberties, has broken completely with the theorists of the social contract, although his idealism has been approached by all those who claim that the State has the sovereignty because it is the best repre- sentative of the impersonal reason, and the best judge of the objective value of maxims, precepts, customs, traditions, collective tendencies, and morals. We can therefore reconcile naturalism and idealism by considering the State, whatever be the form of government, as having in the highest degree the right of regulating morals, of penetrating into private life, not because individuals consent to it, but because it is by nature and by right the highest organ of the reason, and the fittest instrument to establish the rule of the reason over man. But we must beware of absolutist conceptions. The State has rights, just as individuals have, within the limits within which it can fulfil its duties. Now, can it assume the responsibility of every individual act, and even of a large number of collective acts ? If it could, it would be because in- dividuals or communities have no right of initiative, no obligation to reform in order to contribute to social progress. But invention is the doing of in- 284 THE STATE. dividuals, not of the State, which has no imagination ; so that individual minds must collate the common data in their own fashion, and must meet at the point of intersection of those great lines of imitation, which, to quote the saying of M. Tarde, are like the rivers which irrigate the sociological domain. The rights of the State can only therefore be such as to infringe on individual rights, by a reformation prudent or rash, unfortunate or fruitful, and destined to modify more or less considerably an aspect of social life. But they .ought to be wide enough to prevent the propagation of those " pernicious novel- ties" against which all governments have made it their business to protect themselves, as soon as they have detected in them the revolutionary spirit. Here, then, is the problem of the moral right of citizens to revolt against a government which has obstinately persisted in reaction, or of resistance to social progress. Such a government evidently over- steps its rights, and either it ceases to be the real minister of the State, or the State injures the rights of individuals, and goes to its ruin through ignorance of its true r6le ; in the latter case the constitution of the State on new foundations is necessary, and we must go back to the real sources of sovereignty to found a new political right. Such is the moral office of revolutions, which, when lawful, are attempts made by the greatest number to harmonise the effective r6le of the State and the rational conception of that r6le, at a given moment of the social evolution. The present moment seems a suitable time for giving to the central power a very complex social mission — that of social organisation in every stage.^ ^ Cf. Spencer, Principles of Sociology^ chap. xxii. 2 — Tr. DUTIES OF THE STATE. 285 *' The more societies are developed," says M. Durk- heim^ (and this quotation only sums up what we have said above of the evolution of the central power), "the more the State develops; the more and more numerous become its functions, and the further it penetrates into all the other social func- tions which it ipso facto concentrates and unifies. The progress of centralisation is parallel to the pro- gress of civilisation. ... It may be said that there is no more firmly established historic law." It is the State which, " as it has assumed the power, has freed the individuals belonging to particular and local groups which tend to absorb it, such as the family, city, corporation, etc. Individualism and * Statism * have marched in history side by side." If the State cannot be a despot, having all rights over the individual, and if it ought to be freer in pro- portion as it has carried out more obligations, it has acquired more value of its own, and it is imperative, as M. Coste has so clearly laid down,^ that the central power should be more and more "the liberator " of the moral person. " It is a question of preventing usurpation and monopoly; of main- taining harmony and holding the balance between particular interests, and of resisting eccentric and divergent enterprises." In the same order of ideas, M. L. Stein assigns to the State as a transient obliga- tion the duty of decreasing all abnormal power which may check the permanent interests of civilisation. Now the conflict of the living forces whose synergy is indispensable to common life may compromise the future of humanity. It means disorder in the present and radical discontinuity in the future. The State 1 A'ev. Phil.^ 1899, t. xlviii. p. 438. ^ Op. cit.^ p. 190. 286 THE STATE. must therefore extend at once the maximum of rational organisation, and must henceforth proceed with the regular increase of future social organisa^ tion. Politics is an art of foresight as much as wisdom. To be conscious of a collective ideal, to expound it with the utmost clearness to every mind, and thereby to instruct and guide in the realisation of a work of progress, is one of the first duties of a governing body. The State ought to be the focus of light which illumines and revives, which guides and protects. It has the right of struggling against everything which is radically opposed to union, harmony, and progress. That is why it must regulate all modes of activity and existence into which an immoral force might bring disturbance, and which it might guide in a wrong direction. The weak-minded man makes a false inference. Let the law protect him from himself, for in so far as he is badly advised he may injure himself and injure others. The isolated individual may be exploited by the usurer, capitalist, or the unscrupulous, who profit by their power to impose upon him conditions that are contrary to justice and humanity — let the law declare null and void contracts thus imposed by force. What is dangerous for the individual is the sect which, forming a kind of closed community, imposes progressively on its members obedience, renunciation, and sometimes crime. Let the associa- tion be free but not tyrannical; the law should, in this case more than in others, protect the individual in the midst of a blind multitude subject to the domination of a few intriguers, and as such capable of any kind of excess. THE STATE AND ASSOCIATIONS. 287 139. The State and Associations. Association in general, far from being proscribed, ought to be encouraged; for when it is open and remote from the sectarian spirit, when it imposes on the individual no sacrifice either of his dignity, his just rights, or his moral independence, it constitutes the most efficacious protection against the despotism of the central power. The State should aim at organising resistance against all oppression, even against that which a government might attempt in its name. The French Revolution, unfortunately, miscon- ceived this duty of the State. It proscribed associations after having destroyed the corporations, which had made themselves odious precisely because they were in some measure "privileged aggrega- tions," in which despotism reigned, and thus it made "unions" for a long time impossible. But we are coming back to a healthier notion of the rights and duties of the State as far as association is concerned. "What frees the individual," says M. Durkheim^ again, " is not the absence of every regulating principle, but their multiplication, provided that the multiple centres are co-ordinated and subordinated the one to the other." The State has therefore the right to protect young associations, since thus it fulfils its duty of protection with respect to indi- viduals. It will even find before long, as M. Paul Boncour^ puts it, a valuable auxiliary in unions of ( every kind, which only submit their members to i special discipline in order that they may submit , themselves to common discipline, so that each nation ^ Loc, cit, , p. 239. ^ L« Federalisme economique. 288 THE STATE. will form a kind of federation of associations which will already have completed the initial task of social unification. The State will then be able to intervene in the affairs of the community and of the elementary social group, not in order to stifle its life and spontaneity, but to regularise its activity, and to place it in harmony with the activity of the other organs of social life. It is thus that, to use M. Tarde's expression, it will complete its part of *' initiator " by its function as " regulator." 140. The State as Educator, But in so far as it is an initiative power, will it not be the duty of the State to take proper measures for the development of the aesthetic, re- ligious, scientific, and moral sentiments, which are as it were the vital principles of the " social body," the essential appetitions of the common conscience ? Does it not follow that there ought to be, for instance, a State religion, an official instruction in theological, scientific, and moral truth ? The question is that of the duties and rights of the State in matters of education and collective belief. We have already agreed that the social evolution of the collective sentiments tends to increase inces- santly the love of science, to diminish the ardour of religious belief, and to extinguish fanaticism and intolerance. Is it necessary to oppose social evolu- tion on this point, and to endeavour to restore unity of religious belief? What moral interest could such a reaction afford us ? Religious unity cannot give us moral unity, for, THE STATE AS EDUCATOR. 289 as we have already said, the same religious practices may be in accordance with quite different forms of conduct, some moral and some immoral; and further, theological conceptions are so vague and so difficult to accurately define, that their subjectivity will always be an obstacle to identity of belief; in short, the history of religion is a history of schism, heresy, and heterodoxy of every description. In proportion as the modern mind penetrates further into Christian thought, we find that thinkers more readily admit of free discussion. M. Sabatier, the Dean of the Faculty of Protestant Theology at Paris, declared some years ago that orthodoxy in the Reformed Religion is sheer nonsense. The State cannot, therefore, consider it as one of its rights to establish religious unity. Can it con- sider as one of its duties the equal encouragement of every form of religious manifestation ? To those who think that religion is necessary to social life, we may raise the objection that public manifestations of any theological creed whatever are of a nature to wound the independent conscience, and a fortiori that ' of those who have a different religion from that of which we may encourage the development. For believers in general are convinced that they alone possess the truth, and they consider it their duty to combat error. The characteristic of a collective belief being to manifest itself, one may anticipate conflict; and we may fear that the intervention of the State in the discussion of the causes of trouble may not lead to the end proposed, namely, to the harmony of all social forces and the co-operation of every form of energy. And besides, the absence of well-established re- 19 290 THE STATE. ligious truth, an absence which would niake intoler- able the re-establishment of a State religion, removes worship and belief from the collective conscience and makes of it an essentially private matter. The inno- vations and modifications that a citizen thinks should take place in traditional ceremonies concern himself alone, and can only interest the State in so far as the happiness or the unhappiness of the citizens as a whole may depend upon particular acts of piety or impiety. There is, therefore, no reason to oppose the evolution which makes of religious sentiments something more and more foreign to the collective conscience, and which reserves for them a safer asylum in the individual conscience. It is almost the same with the aesthetic sentiments. There can be no official art without outrage to the individual right of free appreciation of works of art and of independent taste. But the case of scientific sentiment is entirely different. Science consists of objective truths and of assertions that may be veri- fied again and again. It is to the public interest that scientific truth be established and extended, that the worship of the true be universal, and that citizens be initiated into that worship from their earliest years. It is, therefore, the duty of the State to see that scientific instruction is given to all, in order to multiply the means of investigation and discovery, and to extend in all directions the idea of fresh con- quests of human reason and of methodical experi- ment. How far, then, may be carried the right of the State in matters of instruction ? Can it compel its citizens to receive such instruction as their minds can understand, can it reserve to itself the right of directing study and forming their minds ? This right THE STATE AS JUDGE. 29I seems incontestable. Is not the duty of knowing rational and scientific data closely connected with that of obeying the reason, and has not the State which ought to protect the individual the right to arm him for his own protection, especially when the arms that are furnished serve the material and moral interests of the community? Just as the State should take measures of general protection against physical harm, poverty, and disease, ought it not to take n\easures of general protection against intel- lectual mischief, ignorance, and error? And if it is therefore its duty to watch over the instruction of all, it has the right to organise, to direct, and to apportion instruction according to the interests which the social system has to realise. No doubt it has not the power to prevent any one from learning, or from learning more, but it has the right to compel each individual to learn as much as the individual degree of intelligence and attention permits. With this right of making instruction obligatory in general is connected, for instance, the right of imposing military instruction for the defence or the safeguard of all, in whatever form and at whatever time is found suitable. 141. The State as Judge, And finally, the State in the same way is supposed to be provided with the wisdom that is requisite to make^ the laws and to determine the duties of the citizen; just as it is considered the born protector and the born instructor of all individuals, so it is the natural distributor of justice. Hence its duty to 292 THE ECONOMICAL ORGANISATION. establish a magistracy, and its right of making arrests, to which when effected in its name every citizen is liable. This magistracy is twofold: part is administrative, and part is judicial. For the rights of the State to be indisputable, in so far as it com- pels respect to its magistrates, administrators, or judges, it has one last duty to fulfil, that of choosing as interpreters of the law men who are thoroughly qualified both by their mental lucidity and by their sense of equity. VI. The Economical Organisation. 142. Competition, It is in the economic order that the intervention of the State seems likely to produce important results in the future. This intervention was for a long time considered as likely to produce more disturbance than benefit; it was thought that the domain of economic facts is the domain of competition between individuals. It would therefore have been necessary rather to organise that competition than to seek to establish an agreement. The struggle for existence is a well-known fact of our own days, but this struggle, which may be circumscribed among the animal races, does not prevent a certain degree of union and agreement among men in view of a better existence. Groups may be formed to struggle against other groups; the citizens of one and the same nation SUBORDINATION OF THE ECONOMIC ORDER. 293 may closely combine in their economic struggle against another nation equally combined.^ The best part of humanity in fact may constitute itself into a single system to struggle against animality, and may attain a more complete control of nature. Evolution takes place in the direction of the suppression of these struggles when they are narrowly circumscribed in the clan, the tribe, the city, the province, the nation. Civil wars are already considered as anomalous. Certain forrtis of com- petition become no less abnormal. Morality is as desirable in economic struggles as in every other sphere of social life. It would be contradictory to lay down as a supreme duty the rational organisation of collective life, and to leave political economy out- side morality as a domain in which success alone is the important matter, and in which the predominant fact must be competition, while everywhere else in social life is established the free agreement of indi- vidual wills under State control and protection. 143. Subordination of the Economic Order to a Higher Order, Immorality consists in the forgetting of the highest needs of human society, and in the exclusive subordination of man to economic ends, such as the acquisition of wealth or the production of means of pleasure. The Kantians see in this abuse of human ^ Protectionists such as Mr. Simon Patten may look forward to this. To them the aim of Protection is the full expansion of the whole economic power of a nation which is called into rivalry with its neighbours. Cf. The Economic Basis of Protection. 294 THE ECONOMICAL ORGANISATION. weakness the sign of a tendency to take humanity in itself as a means and not an end, not to respect the law of duty and the noumenal liberty in the pheno- menal being whose "eminent dignity" and funda- mental autonomy do not tolerate subjection. We may not have metaphysical reasons for con- demning the occasional degradation of reasonable beings, lowered to the rank of beasts of burden, or treated as mere instruments of labour. Reasons borrowed from positive morality do not fail to justify the condemnation of slavery and of analogous modes of social activity. There is in society a hierarchy of different orders. The order of economic facts is un- doubtedly at the base as the first condition of other orders of facts — political, aesthetic, scientific, and so on. If man does not live by bread alone, he must at least begin by being nourished, dressed, and aided in his primary wants and self-preservation. Moreover, it cannot fairly be claimed that economic evolution determines the whole of social evolution. The doctrine of "historical materialism" has certainly insisted too much on economic determinism. As may be seen by what has been said above, the evolution of the means of production has in many cases followed that of the spontaneous tendencies, and of the desires that any "material want" has awakened. The complexity of economic life has political, aesthetic, religious, and social causes of every kind outside the natural evolution of the sources of wealth. But the inventions which con- tribute to industrial progress are not in their origin products of the human mind under the pressure of economic necessity. They are the spontaneous fruit of technical imagination, the direct results of the SUBORDINATION OF THE ECONOMIC ORDER. 295 most disinterested scientific research. It may be asserted that in many cases artistic or scientific disinterestedness has given rise to economic interests. We must let the order of scientific facts play its part, which is extremely important although subordinate — that of the totality of conditioned and conditioning phenomena, but conditioning after the fashion of the pedestal in granite or marble which is necessary for the erection of a statue. The phenomena of wealth, of production, of consumption, and of distribution are means for the social life; we must not make ends of them, and thereby enslave either individuals or communities. This is the pitfall which most econo- mists have not avoided with sufficient care. The wealth of individuals or nations is in itself a matter of indifference to the moralist. Wealth or poverty do not increase or decrease morality. There are certain wealthy regions in which, in spite of a marked propensity to vices such as avarice or debauchery, crime does not increase more than in poor regions in which are developed vices such as intemperance, ignorance, coarseness of manners, etc. In general, very poor populations have more virtues than populations which are weakened by wealth and habituated to luxury. Poverty endured with fortitude is a test of morality. But the possession of a fortune interests morality indirectly in so far as it should serve as a means of social activity* Certain forms of good increase the public means of arriving at scientific truth, artistic enjoyment, or the full expansion of charitable forces. The moral use of wealth is the expenditure of its revenues for more and more lofty social work. It is of importance therefore that the public wealth should increase, that 296 THE ECONOMICAL ORGANISATION. humanity should possess an increasing quantity of material good, in order that the intellectual and moral life of the community may benefit by the leisure and the resources so widely distributed. But if this be the case, what moral importance is acquired by the problem of the production and distribution of wealth! How closely is political economy sub- ordinated to morality! Now, if there is a natural evolution to promote, if there are reforms to be realised, it is to the law that we must appeal in the widest measure possible; it is the State which must assume new duties and arro- gate to itself new rights. 144. The Role of the State. Let us remain faithful to the fundamental prin- ciples which limit the rights of the sovereign in private matters, the principle of the greatest possible expansion of individual liberty hand in hand with that of State control and protection, and the prin- ciple of co-ordination and prevision by the central power, in view of the progressive realisation of an ideal of harmony and spontaneous agreement between social forces of the most diverse character. The r6le of the State then clearly appears to be that of a power which promotes the economical evolution of which we have already marked out the stages. In proportion as the division of labour daily involves, in a manner more and more marked, the triumph of special aptitudes, we see the working classes unite for self-perfection, and endeavour to form in the same industrial establishment a great family, in which each needs all, and in which all hold in just esteem THE STATE PRINCIPLE AND THE CORVEE. 297 the part that is playec^ by each. Thus is realised progressively the solidarity of the working classes, a solidarity from which we may expect the greatest good from the point of view of the protection of the individual, of encouragement of the inventor, and of aid in case of the artisan who is out of work or suffering from illness. The extension of the r61e which has devolved on the unions, within the limits which have been laid down above, is desirable and even necessarj^ With- out granting privileges and monopolies which would tend to turn all unions into new corporations as detestable as the old, the State can and ought to favour every group which may assist it as auxiliaries in the work of the economic organisation of the country. These associations will be able in pro- portion as they acquire more power to realise vaster designs and to give more breadth to industrial enter- prise, and at the same time to increase the public wealth and the well-being of all their members. 145. The State Principle and the Corvee, Ought the State to go further and become a kind of magnified union, the sole proprietor, the sole distributor of work and property, a kind of Providence which provides for the needs of all by fixing the nature and the duration of the labour of each ? Suppose we admit that if men all work a few hours a day at the production of objects of con- sumption which are indispensable to material life; all men may then be able to enjoy leisure, which some may employ in scientific research, others in 298 THE ECONOMICAL ORGANISATION. works of art, and all in the satisfaction of higher and properly human needs, — granted this, has not the, State the right of imposing without exception on its; different elements what has sometimes been called the corvee ? The right of imposing defined modes of activity^ with a view to the public safety, or welfare, or health, or universal morality, is incontestable. It has been in fact affirmed on many occasions. The State exacts its corvee whenever no remunerated service can fulfil the functions accomplished by all with complete devotion to the State: for example in case of fire, inundation, famine, or invasion* Military service is the type of the corvee which is commended by many socialists.^ If it were proved that social morality and the collective well-being would gain in realisation by the process which answers to the need of national defence and of all work that the material exist- ence of the nation requires, the State would not hesitate to "nationalise" the principal means of production, and those great enterprises which have hitherto remained in private hands, and which have been denounced as a tax on the public wealth or harmful to the physical and moral health of all the citizens. But if Plato could conceive of the State as charged, first with the union, then with the entire education, and finally with the distribution to all the citizens of functions and pVoperty, we must not for- ^ It must be remembered that M. G. Renard reduces to a minimum, in his Regime socialisie (Alcan, 1898), the part played by these indus- trial services, which, he says, ** would be secured by a process analogous to that of military service." THE STATE PRINCIPLE AND THE CORVEE. 299 get that he over-simplified economic life, which in his day was anything but complex, and that he was in- spired much more by the remote past than by social evolution as a whole. Human civilisation began with a very rudimentary kind of communism. Social homogeneity, the common possession of objects of consumption and means of production, some reduced to products, others to the simplest modes of activity, made a common life easy and even obligatory. In our days the complexity of collective existence has made it difficult to con- centrate in the hands of the State the means of production knd objects of consumption. Incessant and varied exchange, by determining the expansion of financial operations, has more and more com- pelled the State to have recourse to the method which most easily enables it to dispose of the public revenue — viz., the process of taxation by law and of expenditure by budget. The principal inconvenience of the corvee system is the crowding of individuals, often against their will, into manu- factories or shops; further, it leaves no freedom to the worker, as though the real worker were only a piece of machinery producing at a fixed rate a quantity of determined work. What is more im- portant than the quantity is the quality, and that depends on skill, and therefore on interest in specialisation. And what is more important than docility and regularity is invention, which can only take place by leaving to the individual the right of change, and a right as it were to make mistakes, to make experiments, and a right to consumption that may possibly be fruitless. 300 TH5 ECONOMICAL ORGANISATION. 146. Taxation, On the other hand, the system of taxes leaves to the producer and the consumer the maximum of liberty, while it permits the State to play the broadest r6le that can be conceived. We ought, therefore, to foresee and to admit a continued increase in the pecuniary burdens imposed upon individuals as the consequence of a continuous expansion of the r6le which has devolved on the central power. Social evolution may rightly tend to make each citizen according to his individual competence a functionary of the State. To the regime of com- petition corresponds the selection by competition of agents who are supposed to be the fittest to render services which are sometimes very complex. To the regime of co-operation should correspond the breaking up of the present great functions into small and much more specialised functions, re- munerated in each case according to the aptitude of the individual to fulfil the duty assigned to him. The time will thus come when there will be no longer only a limited number of citizens who are exclusively State functionaries, and when all citizens will be more or less such officials for a few hours a day, or for a small portion of their activity. In that case the State will have not so much to feed its employes as to remunerate their services, to exchange with each citizen the means of subsist- ence in return for those products which are in- dispensable to the collective life. Two practical problems will therefore be pre- sented. How shall we redistribute the taxes, and SOLIDARITY IN THE ECONOMIC ORDER. 3OI how far can we make private enterprises public? The latter problem may be solved in a variety of ways according to the degree of civilisation and the economic situation. At the present moment a large number of States have already taken under their charge a portion of the expense of public instruc- tion, a portion of the expenses of assistance to the sick and the old, and the protection and material maintenance of poor children or foundlings. We constantly see our Parliaments increasing their subsidies and making fresh sacrifices to secure, for example, cheap transport or certain articles of cheap food ; on the other hand, we see great nations paying very high prices to encourage certain forms of cultivation, navigation, emigration, etc., thus improving the condition of the farmers, sailors, and colonists. The fact that an enterprise is of public utility is sufficient reason for the State to intervene pecuniarily and morally, and to partly nationalise it by the aid of taxes. It is certainly not immoral to turn in this fashion every great enterprise, which is now private and of capital importance to the national life, into a public concern, and thereby to cheapen the means which are indispensable to the subsistence of all. It secures for all, by means of the public funds, at any rate assistance against poverty. It enables all to raise themselves more and more above the life of the brutes, and to taste of those intellectual and aesthetic pleasures which ennoble mankind. 147. Solidarity in the Economic Order. For this purpose all must sacrifice to the State a portion of their income. And it is exactly in the 302 THE ECONOMICAL ORGANISATION. variable relations between the benefits received by the individual from society and the services rendered by him to the common cause that human solidarity can best be manifested. These relations most often run the risk of being in inverse proportion. In fact, it is not the man who is powerful by his intellect, by his ability from this or that point of view, who will have most need of the aid of his fellows; but, qua abler man, it is only moral that he should owe more, and that the social burdens which weigh upon him should be proportional to his means of action. We have seen, in fact, that as duty rests on good- will, social obligations increase with the growth of power. To pay a tax is one of these obligations; and even if it be true, as we have often supposed, that the tax will more and more take the place of all individual contributions to the collective charges that may be exacted by the State, we must see in the payment of the pecuniary contribution one of the first duties of the citizen, a duty the higher in the hierarchy of moral obligations in pro- portion as the economic r6le of the State becomes greater. One serious objection cannot fail to be raised to such a conception. It is, that if the advantages are not proportional to the services rendered, if on the other hand the idlest and most unworthy of men none the less enjoy the benefit of the labour of others, a kind of premium will be given to inaction, idleness may become general, and the social system may collapse as a natural consequence. If the objection hold good, it follows that the only things that determine man to work are naturail necessities and economic needs. Now we have SOLIDARITY IN THE ECONOMIC ORDER. 303 already seen the exaggeration in the doctrine that claims to make of material needs the sole motives of human activity. On the other hand, do we not daily see that the laziness of certain men is due to their morbid disposition, such that even if hunger and thirst were to prove a still more powerful stimu- lant to labour, they would nevertheless remain idle ? Is it not true, on the contrary, that a large number of men work who need not ; and can we believe that inventors, for instance, the great agents of industrial progress and economic prosperity, would cease to imagine, to study, or to make an effort, even if they were deprived of all material recompense? It is laying too much stress on the baseness of the sentiments of the majority of men to think that the cause of civilisation is compromised because bread and shelter have been secured to a few wretches with no self-respect. There is nothing which entitles us to believe that once the most urgent necessities of material existence are provided for as far as possible by the care of the State, the individual would not consider it a point of honour to give back to the community the benefits which he has received from it. Thus, on the contrary, an incomparable intel- lectual impulse and an incomparable economic activity will instil into the community an increasing solicitude for all its members, and will secure for individuals wider and more generous action, more fertile initiative, greater wealth, and a well-being which will always be favourable to their moral elevation. Without prejudice to private property, the problem of the conflict between labour and capital will be made easier by the amelioration of the lot of the lowly. 304 THE ECONOMICAL ORGANISATION. 148. The Wages System. Karl Marx^ has endeavoured to establish a filial relationship between ancient slavery, modern serf- dom, and the wages system. In reality, serfdom from its origin is opposed to slavery, and the wages system has been received with enthusiasm by the adversaries of serfdom. As Letourneau has re- marked, these institutions co-existed in Egypt and Greece without causing confusion; in Sweden, according to Dareste, serfdom has never existed. The artisan, once so despised that he was not only refused the title of citizen but also every moral dignity, tends more and more to become an inde- pendent personality even from the economical point of view. The wages system, which is nowadays so vehemently attacked, is condemned to disappear because it does not leave room for the moral evo- lution of the artisan. In law, wages is the result of a contract, by which a man engages to furnish a determined technical activity for a certain number of hours a day to a master, who, in return, engages to procure for him certain material advantages, generally a certain sum of money. But as a matter of fact the regime of the wages ' system is often in opposition to the regime of free contract. The conditions under which the workman engages to work for his master are often imposed by the latter, who, in union with most other masters, or at any rate in consequence of a tacit understanding, does not stop to discuss the matter with the work- 1 Capital, p. 550,— Tr. THE WAGES SYSTEM. 305 man; and the workman, if he is not to die of hunger, must certainly accept the offer. On the other hand, it sometimes happens that the members of a union impose their price on the master, and being certain of success, have not to fight but to command. It follows, therefore, that the wages system perpetuates a state of war. And there is a still more serious matter. Is not the contract of the wages system a contract of hire, which makes of the workman a thing, a tool, a simple means of wealth in the hands of the capitalist ? If we consider facts and history, says M. Renouvier,^ the wage-earners incontestably " have been placed and often even now are placed in a con- . dition in which not only can they have no property ' of their own, but they are unable to acquire any. . They find themselves reduced to the bare means of livelihood from day to day, and so are shut off from all more remote ends whether of an intellectual or of a moral nature." We know Karl Marx's^ theory of surplus-value and over-production. Into the prices at which goods are sold enter essentially the wages of the workmen and the profit of the master. This profit is due to over- production — that is to say, to the hours of " unpaid " work which are imposed on the workman beyond the number of hours that are necessary for the needs of society. The capitalist endeavours to increase the surplus- value which results from the incorporation into his goods of an ever-increasing number of hours of work, and of an ever more considerable amount of effective ^ op. cit., t. ii. p. 86. 2 "Salaries, Prices, andTrofils," Capital, pp. 156-300, 516-541. -Tr. 20 306 THE ECONOMICAL ORGANISATION. work. It follows that, even without decrease of wages, the profits of the masters increase to the detriment of their men, and that life which becomes more costly to the consumers is more costly to the working classes generally, so that a rise in wages does not improve their condition. The morality of a few masters can do nothing against these inevitable consequences of the wages system. If they were to increase wages, or to reduce the number of hours of work, they would be ruined by the severity of competition. 149. Co-operation. The State is therefore sooner or later called upon to intervene in the present regime of labour, to fix the judicial limits within which may be exercised that individual right of contract without injury to the moral dignity of the human person affected. The regulation of labour, notably with respect to the maximum hours of labour and the minimum wage, must therefore be imposed upon the State. This is the modern thesis which rightly assigns to the State the regulative function which is dis- tinctly proper to it. But can it be expected that State regulation will be sufficient to give to the working man adequate moral dignity? It seems that there can be no moral satisfaction to humanity until social labour as a whole appears as free co- operation, in which no material or moral compulsion is exercised by one set of men on another in virtue of the power of the one and the weakness of the other. It is not a case of hiring the activity of an indi- CO-OPERATION. 307 vidual ; it is rather a case of services which should be exchanged between men having an equal respect the one for the other, and a reciprocal esteem for their different aptitudes. The division of labour involves, in addition to the increasing specialisation of apti- tudes and an increasing individual value, the more and more marked independence of the good workman who works at his ease, sells his labour or his services, and receives, not the price of his hours of labour, but the share that is due to his talent, his knowledge, his skill, and his co-operation in a piece of work. How much better would the legitimate pride of a good workman and his independence with regard to the master be secured in a society in which, in the first place, free association would furnish to the indi- vidual every moral and pecuniary support, and in which the State would afterwards assure to all a life free from pecuniary anxiety. It is not a question of repeating the blunders of 1848 and 1849, and of opening national workshops for men who are out of work. The State cannot engage to find a liveli- hood for a swarm of officials, who, if they did not work would compromise the public weal, and if they did work would cause such a competition with private industry that it would be unjustly condemned and would have to disappear. But the workman with a family, wife, parents, and children to feed and to bring up, both must and can, if need be, struggle in defence of his legitimate claims against the some- times overwhelming power of capital. Should he claim in case of need his rights and those of his companions, the conditions under which his claim is made are the most favourable if his subsistence has been made as cheap as possible to him, and if the 3o8 THE ECONOMICAL ORGANISATION. material well-being assured to all by the State has enabled him to save and to protect himself in advance by far-sighted economy. We may rest assured that under such conditions the right of striking — which must be recognised, for it is the guarantee of the independence of the work- ing classes — would be exercised peacefully; the fear of poverty, of being a short time out of work, is the cause of most acts of violence committed in the con- flicts of labour; it is this fear that maddens and blinds. When a powerful union maintains its mem- bers, who are already strong in themselves, the solution is easy and rapid. We see this in England where the trades unions constitute an economic organ of the highest importance. 150. The Work of Women and Children. In the same way, thanks to such an organisation, we might lessen the effects of the general tendency to the employment of women and children, in so far as that tendency is reconcilable with a healthy social organisation. No doubt woman can play, and ought to play, a r6le of more and more importance in political economy, and she may contribute to the material prosperity of a country by work which is pro- portioned to her strength, and which corresponds to her aptitudes; but she cannot without serious inconvenience desert the domestic hearth, abandon her children, and be compelled to devote herself to continuous labour which removes her from the cares of the household, and to a fatiguing toil which is harmful to the exercise of her natural function — maternity. As for the child, it cannot be employed THE VALUE OF THE WORKMAN. 309 at an early age except to the detriment of its instruction, its education, its physical and moral development, and its technical value. The society which cannot prevent the excessive labour, prolonged or premature, of women and children is not a morally organised society. 151. The Value of the Workman. In a community in which wealth is distributed according to social value, in which the worker is not compelled by the most pressing material needs to sacrifice his rights and those of his wife and children, one of the first duties of every man is to acquire his proper technical value. Since a social system must be realised, no one has the right to consider himself as exempt from working on behalf of the realisation of this system. The obligation of labour, that no morality but a social morality can demonstrate, seems to me to be rigor- ously established by the rational subordination of individual to collective ends, by the subordination of a system that is restricted to a system that is wider. It goes without saying that the word "labour" must be taken in its widest sense, and that it simply implies methodic activity continued with effort in order to realise a piece of work, either aesthetic, or of urgent necessity, whether scientific or political. Every man takes up a trade, according to his aptitudes and social needs. That the country requires a large number of farmers or sailors is not sufficient reason for imposing on the majority of its inhabitants the profession of a farmer or a seafaring life; and that is perhaps the 310 THE ECONOMICAL ORGANISATION. mistake made by some collectivists when they practi- cally ignore individual aptitudes by claiming to dic- tate to each individual the career he must follow, according to the economic necessities of society. But, on the other hand, if a man have an artistic temperament, that is no reason for his abandoning the plough or the pick, the field or the mine, and thus swelling the ranks of unappreciated painters or musicians. In fact, we have sometimes seen the liberal professions overcrowded and manual labour neglected through our paying too much attention to individual aptitudes and ignoring social necessities. 152. The Choice of a Profession. A man may therefore fail in his duty as a worker although he works with energy and talent, because there has been developed in him an aptitude society does not require, while it claims the equally possible development of other aptitudes. Social morality therefore enters even into the choice of a profession, and this choice requires both psychological knowledge and sociological data. Parents cannot determine the future of their child- ren, and young men cannot embrace a career without the preliminary inquiry: what are the necessary aptitudes? Does the future worker pos- sess them ? Will society need such services ? How useful therefore it would be if minute observations were taken from the birth of the child on his character, his mode of mental development, his tastes both in the family and at school, his sensorial imaginative and emotional type, and his intellectual and practical capacity! Provided with such infor- THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF THE WORKMAN. 31I mation, the psychologist would be in a position to pronounce an opinion on the value of the pro- fessional choice made by the young man or by his family.^ Then the sociologist would appear on the scene. In most cases his place might be taken by any judicious observer, who, for instance, foreseeing the development of a taste for architecture or an interest in agriculture, would advise the would-be artist to be an architect rather than a painter, and the would-be artisan to take up an agricultural rather than an industrial career. 153. The Rights and Duties of the Workman. A choice made with discrimination is the most likely to be completely moral. Immediately it is made it involves rights for him who accepts the obligation of working with determination at the real- isation of the social system. So far, the child had a right only to tHe general education and instruction which might adapt him to the special education and instruction which he must henceforth receive. But the right to apprenticeship results from the duty of learning and of specialising, a duty which itself results from the sociological law of the division of labour. This right devolves on the family, the city, and the State, and even on every more or less restricted community organised in view of the accomplishment of a definite social function — such as, for example, a union or a corporation. ' GaIton*s Life History Album (ATacmillnn) will be founfl to facilitate the record of such observations, — Tk, 312 THE ECONOMICAL ORGANISATION. It IS right that the obligation to give the young a professional education should be divided between each of these social groups. In general, the family may assist apprenticeship rather than give it directly. The city and the State may prepare for it very satisfactorily, or may complete it by professional schools; but it is especially to the associations of trades, the guardians of traditions, the depositories of ancient precepts as well as of recent innovations, by which is affirmed the continuity of human effort in a determined direction and on a definite point of laborious activity — it is especially to these modern unions, for which the most brilliant future is on all sides predicted, and which we hope will render the same services as the ancient corporations without reviving their abuses — it is to these that we look for the ultimate formation of the aptitudes of the worker. The master who nowadays undertakes the duty of forming a workman substitutes himself for the whole body of the trade of which he is sometimes but a secondary element ; he is not always adapted to the accomplishment of the task that he undertakes, and often misconceives the extent of his duties. He has a right to the obedience, the respect, and the grati- tude of his apprentice, and to the gratitude of his fellow-citizens; but only so far as he has the power and the will to bring into society a new factor of prosperity or happiness. On the other hand, the workman with respect to whom society has fulfilled its duties of general and technical education has a right to consideration, only so far as he is prepared to furnish to society a factor of progress. It follows that it is his duty to make THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF THE WORKMAN. 313 himself acquainted with everything connected with his trade, and to bring into it that spirit of discipline and of independence which permits of social reforms and valuable inventions. As for the workman with respect to whom society has fulfilled all its duties of protection, by furnishing him in free association defensive weapons against every form of abuse, against poverty, against disease, and against the despotism of the capitalist, is it not his duty to strengthen in his turn a beneficent organisation and to develop the moral and material power of his association or of his union ? Can he rest content with an increase in his personal comfort while ignoring his duties with respect to the collective wealth and the common honour ? We have seen how the evolution of the forms of property tends to the expansion of individual pro- perty, both real and personal. This tendency has been legalised by general considerations and affirmed by a comprehensive conception of a social ideal. It is the same with the tendency of certain communities, professional unions, or other groups having for their end the realisation of a common economical aim. The extension of collective property, which is the object of this tendency, is desirable in order to give material support to professional solidarity, in order to realise more completely the community of interests of the workmen. The individual therefore must labour at the development of the general wealth, and he or his fellows must furnish to his group the best means of defence and support. 314 THE FAMILY, FRIENDSHIP, ETC. VII. The Family, Friendship, and the Collective Sentiments. 154. The Rights of Woman. Family evolution seemed opposed to the spirit of authority which dominated the constitution of the ancient family; hence the expression, the "dis- solution of the family" so frequently employed to indicate ,a future which did not so much involve the ruin of the family as the decadence of what had appeared to be its fundamental principle — the power of the chief. Ought morality to teach woman blind obedience and unconditional submission to her husband? Here it seems that the title of citizen or repre- sentative of the State, and therefore of law and reason in the family community, can be bestowed on man alone. He has responsibilities, and he has duties of the most varied nature. The wife, on the other hand, has the most peaceful possible life; she seems to have no right to anything but to protection. However, the difference between the faculties of the man and of the woman is not so great that we can assert that the subordination of the one sex to the other is necessary in the future. "We do not dispute," says M. Renouvier, and rightly, "that many men are inferior to many women on the very points in which we should say women are as a whole inferior to men. ... It is true that if the faculties of women and men do not differ essentially, they have THE RIGHTS OF WOMAN. 315 functions which are naturally diverse. It does not follow that woman may be deprived of her right as a reasonable being to determine her own choice and to proceed freely in her own autonomy." M. J. Lourbet^ asserts that "the apparent inferiority of woman is accidental, provisional, and external in the indefinite evolution of humanity, this inferiority having its principle in the physical minority." We know that Lombroso and Ferrero ^ have not hesitated to admit that there are natural tendencies to immorality in both women and children. Love of children is the predominant characteristic of the sex. It manifests itself not only in the nervous, muscular, and bony systems, but also in all the other functions — circulation, respiration, secretions, etc. The mater- nal function injures the intellectual development. " Intelligence varies in inverse ratio to fecundity." Woman is inferior to man from the point of view of the development of the sentiments. If she is more irritable, more demonstrative, and more accessible to the contagion which causes the collective emotions, pain and joy are less profound in her than in man. By a curious paradox woman is equally accessible to cruelty and to pity. Native criminality is less frequent in woman than in man : " woman is an inoffensive demi-criminaloid." She is much more addicted to prostitution than to real crime. Now prostitution is not a result of degeneration. " Prostitution," says M. G. Richard,* " is a matter of exchange. It is one of the features ^ Le Problime des Sexes, Giard et Briere. Paris, 1900. ' La Fetnme Criminelle et la Prostitu'ee. Alcan, 1896 (in part trans- lated into English as The Female Offender), ' Rev. Phil.^ 1896, t. xlii. p. 529. 3l6 THE FAMILY, FRIENDSHIP, ETC. of a type of society in which everything is valued in money. It is an abnormal profession which has its own school, its inferior degrees, and its aristocracy. It is a trade to which a child is too often dedicated by its family, with the tacit consent of indifferent authority, especially when the child has that external beauty which is rarely found in degeneration." We may accept this opinion of M. Richard, recognising that many young girls having tendencies to prostitu- tion present the stigmata of degeneration: frequent mental lack of balance, and a remarkable diminution of lofty sentiments, stigmata which show them to be akin to the " morally insane." The establishment of a social cause for prostitution makes us even agree with M. Lourbet that it is "radically wrong to draw- conclusions as to the woman of the future from the woman of the past. Contemporary science cannot, by any absolutely determined principle, assert that woman is incurably weak." Why should she have by nature less sensibility or intelligence than man ? Admitting with Lombroso that maternity interrupts the development of the highest intellectual faculties, admitting that the various physiological and psychic disturbances which are inevitable in a woman may place an obstacle in the way of normal and perfectly continuous evolution, it must be recognised that the feminine type which we know is — as I have said in my essay on Mental Instability — the product of a social evolution which is abnormal rather than a natural fact, and not an immutably inferior type.^ Woman becomes more and more capable of work and sustained effort. The competition of the sexes in the studio, in teaching, and in all the liberal pro- ^ On all these questions see Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman.— Ivi, MARRIAGE. 317 fessions, is beginning to be quite appreciable. In particular, she brings into her intellectual activity qualities of subtlety, penetration, and vivacity, which in spite of a generally well-marked mental instability make her assistance in the work of civilisation of increasing value. No doubt, in feminine emancipation there is a pathological side which has been rather hastily considered by all those who consider woman as inevitably condemned to ignorance, fear, submission, and inconsistent frivolity. The desertion of the home, the loss of grace, taste, refinement, elegance, beauty, modesty, and feminine charm, the leaving of children to the care of hirelings, the neglect of conjugal duties, and the hatred of regular life — these may be for a certain time the price that must be paid for the progress realised by the emancipation of woman. But all the errors, all the faults, and all the new vices of a sex which is boldly endeavouring to develop itself along its own lines, cannot constitute a proof of the inaptitude of woman to be more and more a guide to herself and to act as a moral person. 155. Marriage. Marriage was at the outset based on violence. Rape is so frequent in primitive societies that many tribes have retained symbols of it in their matri- monial ceremonies. In our own days marriage rarely implies free, well-reasoned, and reflective con- sent in the contracting parties. Family traditions, manners and customs, the spirit of caste, and the tyrannical will of parents, often make of the legal union a violation of the individual right. On the 3l8 THE FAMILY, FRIENDSHIP, ETC. Other hand, it is impossible not to take into account the power of impulses, which often impel to acts of violence, and make of fear and the accomplished fact the point of departure of grave injustice. However, an increasing share is given to the free choice of each, and new. guarantees are ever being taken against the pressure exercised by the family or the environment. Marriage becomes more and more a matter of contract between two individuals of different sex, who wish to give a legal basis to their sexual relations, a legal consequence to their union. The State intervenes in this contract, as it does in all contracts which have a legal value, in order to regulate its essential conditions and to assure that they are carried out. This intervention is the first guarantee of respect for the rights of woman and of the accomplishment of the duties which are most generally imposed. But it is hardly possible for the State to penetrate further into family life, and to regulate the petty details of existence — petty details into which, how- ever, either morality or immorality must enter. As M. Renouvier says,^ the only moral conditions in the relation of the sexes are prudence and temper- ance, "the mutual duty of justice and fidelity to explicit or tacit promises, and the recognition of the duties which arise as the consequences of the relation." But is there not sufficient ground for a detailed analysis of those duties which M. Renouvier calls duties of justice ? Do not they comprise from the outset the duties of love, which if they are not strictly speaking obligations of justice are none the less the most solid foundation of conjugal rights? ^ Op. cit., vol. i. p. 573. MARRIAGE. 319 To compel a person to love, it will be said, is a contradiction in terms. Is there not such an opposition between the obligation and the spon- taneity of love, that if love becomes obligatory it completely disappears ? And so it is not a question of obliging one of two married people to love the other, but rather of making love itself the indispens- able condition of moral marriage. No doubt it will be objected that there are numerous cases of free, sincere, profound, and lasting love following the sexual union; but as nothing is more uncertain than the appearance of such a sentiment, are we authorised by a few examples of quite fortuitous conjugal happiness to leave to chance the appearance of one of its essential conditions, and to expect as an effect of the sexual union what ought to be its cause ? Some philosophers — men, too, w^ho are not with- out weight — have offered artificial selection as a remedy for what we call degeneration. Would it not be far better to leave it to natural selection, operating by the birth of reciprocal love and the adaptation of character and temperament. No doubt, if happy results are to follow, this implies the intervention of the reason, called in to moderate the ardour of certain pathological tendencies, and to bring into play impulsive feelings and ends of a scientific or moral order. And besides, this implies a profound modification of the manners of to-day, at any rate in most civilised countries, where the young girl is kept most strictly on her guard with respect to young men, as remote as possible from real life, and is, theoretically at least, ignorant of the part that she is called upon to play in society. 320 THE FAMILY, FRIENDSHIP, ETC. 156. The Co-education and Equality of the Sexes} Before we can give a lofty moral value to marriage the education of the young man and young woman must be quite different to what they receive at the present day in France. On the one hand, the young girl must be, prepared to fulfil her function as wife and mother, either being adapted from her early years to the social environment in which she is to be developed, or being made strong and really virtuous, instead of remaining a meek dependant, always exposed to the risk of harm if the super- vision of which she is the object becomes relaxed. On the other hand, the young man must become accustomed to a respect for the rights of the young woman, and this will be all the easier when she is able to claim those rights with more moral authority. If, by means of these important modifications in the relation of the sexes before marriage, love may become an essential factor of the sexual relations which are regularised by a public act, woman must not after her marriage lose her dignity as a moral being. She is man's equal, from the point of view of law. "The idea of marriage implies this equality, but this was not the wish of the man. Injustice has made men illogical; and all the derogations which the need of safeguarding personal liberty, and the violation of duty on one side or the other, could bring into the law of monogamy, have been decided exclusively in favour of the man. . . . Unfair laws and even more unfair customs are still ^ Cf. Comenius, Didact, 45; Munroe, The Educational Ideal ^ pp. 80 et seq,; Mabel Hawtrey, The Co-education of the Sexes (Kegao raul).— Tr. DIVORCE AND DUTIES TOWARDS CHILDREN. 32I in contradiction to the reason which created mono- gamy, and to this is due the gap between the real and the practical social ideal. Hence arose the establish- ment of another kind of slavery formed of the pariahs of the family. Contempt for the law of equality in marriage is its source."^ Properly speaking then, we cannot have sub- ordination of the woman to the man without moral decay. The harmony realised by good re- ciprocal dispositions, by the mutual understanding based on common obedience to the prescriptions of reason, can alone secure the stability of conjugal life. When in a family there is a master and subordinates, there is either conflict or abdication, a state of war or an abnormal weakening of will. Marriage and the conjugal life should therefore be founded on reciprocal esteem, on an equal respect on both sides for moral dignity and individual liberty, on an affec- tionate sentiment so profound and lasting, that esteem and respect will ever form part of those sentiments which can only be experienced at the price of re- newed and more and more painful effort. 157. Divorce and Duties towards Children. The right t)f divorce is the consequence of this moral precept ; in fact, as soon as love or affection, sincere esteem, and goodwill disappear in conjugal relationship, why should we be compelled to lead a common life which becomes more and more unbear- able ? In the days of barbarism, when woman was considered as an instrument of pleasure, one of th^ 1 Renouvier, op. cit.y t. i, p, 579, 2X 322 THE FAMILY, FRIENDSHIP, ETC. greatest tasks of the State, in those days intimately connected with the Church, was to prevent the in- cessantly reappearing scandal of repudiation for purely sensual reasons. Divorce was then pro- scribed, and the indissolubility of the religious and civil bond was energetically affirmed. But in pro- portion as we advance towards a social state based much more on right and duty than on force and caprice, divorce becomes an indispensable auxiliary of family morality — so long as it is only pronounced in well-defined cases, and with all the guarantees that can be offered by a social measure regulated by well- defined laws. If there are children of the marriage, the question of divorce becomes from the moral point of view still more complex, as it is no longer solely a question of assuring respect for the individual rights of the husband and wife, but of securing the accom- plishment of the obligations they have contracted with respect to their children. From the sociological point of view, the principal raison d'etre of the family is the duties that parents owe to their children. The family, like the city and the State, has as its end not so much the exercise of a power as the accomplish- ment of duties. It is not so much a question of what the pride of the Roman father, the patria potestaSy did of old, as of the numerous obligations that nature and reason impose on parents who are desirous of playing the social r6le which begins with the very birth of their children. The solidarity of human generations, succeeding one another and leaving one to the other the acquisi- tions of past centuries added to those of the present age, makes the duty of the present generation to be DIVORCE AND DUTIES TOWARDS CHILDREN. 323 an incessant preparation for the social future. Society is like a living being, which tends to persevere in its being and to develop it. It endeavours to persist, and therefore it assures itself of the future by the procreation and education of children. The first organ of social survival is the family. It may be compared for two reasons to the organ of reproduc- tion : first, because it has effectively for its end the birth of new social beings ; and, secondly, because by the early education that it gives, it perpetuates the collective tradition, and transmits to new genera- tions the spirit, the manners, the language, and the aptitudes of previous generations. If we can no longer speak of the rights of children, at least we may consider the rights of humanity looked upon as a kind of moral personality, as a system in process of realisation, whose requirements create duties to each successive generation, duties which become greater and more numerous in proportion as we advance in the way of civilisation. The family responds to a certain number of these re- quirements which are perceived and affirmed by the reason. Hence spring the duties of parents to their children, quite apart from the fact that the natural sympathy of strong for weak beings,^ the sentiment of tenderness to the children that one has brought into the world, 2 must determine disposi- tions favourable to their spontaneous accomplish- ment. The general duty of procuring for the child all its material needs, food, clothes, etc., is not, in fact, of ^ Spencer sees in this sympathy the foundation of paternal and maternal love. - 2 cf. Bain and Espinas. 324 THE FAMILY, FRIENDSHIP, ETC. greater importance from the human point of view, than that of procuring for it an intellectual and moral environment favourable to the birth of those social aptitudes and virtues which will enable it to become as perfect a man and citizen as possible. There is therefore a grave objection to the dis- solution of the family, either by the hasty dispersion of its members, or by the divorce of the wedded pair. There are many cases in which a persistent ex- ample of scandalous conduct is a greater obstacle to the proper education of children than even divorce itself. There are other cases in which, in spite of the profound disagreement of parents, a common solicitude for their children obliges the husband and wife not to give up living under the same roof. The sense of the duties contracted with respect to the children should survive the ruin of love, affection, and esteem. Divorce, the deliberate weakening of the family spirit, may therefore in many circumstances assume a character of immorality, and constitute a crime with respect to society. 158. Duties of Children. We may speak of the duties of children towards their parents, since the former seem to have a func- tion to fulfil with respect to the latter, and yet there seems to be no reciprocity. Classical morality teaches obedience and respect as the principal duties of the child. Now, no beings as irreflective as children, with a moral conscience as wavering and weak as that of children, can understand duty and really practise moral obligation. They have only the habits and rudiments of customs that suggestion DUTIES OF CHILDREN. 325 or education, and the example of the natural authority of strong and reasonable beings have given them. When they obey it, it is either because they have not the least doubt as to the importance of the command they have received, or because they fear punishment. The authority that parents have over their children comes to them rather from their firm- ness, their justice, and their constancy, than from the budding morality of young beings in whom there scarcely yet exists either affection, or spontaneous sympathy, or gratitude for the many cares and many kindnesses that have been shown them. And when it is a question of young people who are capable of reflection, of reasoning, and of understand- ing a moral obligation, the obedience that is due is limited, for the very reason that a moral conscience is entitled to a certain independence, and there is no true morality without free appreciation and an ad- hesion exempt from restraint. The more the young man exercises his reason, the more he is independent from the moral and the legal point of view. His parents no longer represent to him wider experience. They may have an intellect less capable than his own, a less powerful mind, and a less reliable practical judgment. Often they represent the past, that is to say, the conservative and timid spirit, the enemy of reform and of bold and generous enterprise. There may be disobedience on the part of the children, or, at any rate, nonconformity with the advice of parents, without its involving any lack of respect. Respect, in fact, does not really exist until the moral being is in the presence of a per- son having a high moral value. One may differ in opinion with a person whom one respects; but we 326 THE FAMILY, FRIENDSHIP, ETC. must find in that person sincerity, and a keen desire to possess the truth and to do his duty. The quite young child has no real respect; he has either fear, if he has been accustomed to brutal treatment and threats, or a kind of simple admira- tion, such as Mr. Baldwin^ has pointed out, for those superior beings who seem to him to know everything, to be able to give him the final explanation of every- thing, and who never deceive him either in word or act. In the young man and the adult there is more often deference than real esteem, and we cannot say that respect for aged parents ought to be greater than that which is due to honourable and famous old men. But the sentiment which is not imposed, and which morality does not place in man's heart, and which can be always fortified by showing how lawful it is, and how well it agrees with the family spirit of sociability, is filial affection, the love for those beings whose devotion and self-denial have often been the admiration of persons outside the family community. Thanks to this strength of paternal and maternal, as well as of filial love, the union of the different ele- ments will not remain the mere effect of moral will. The spring of all social life is disinterested sentiment, and nowhere is it more necessary than here. 159. Friendship and Fraternity. The tendency to sacrifice, not to remain closely circumscribed by the first community with which the individual comes into contact, a community formed ^ Moral aud Social Interpretation of Mental Deve'opmetU^ \%if^ FRIENDSHIP AND FRATERNITY. 327 at its birth, which sometimes develops what might be called "family egoism," should find support in friend- ship. To have friends is a duty; the man who has no friends is not in general a moral being. In antiquity, friendship took precedence of love.^ It became in the days of Aristotle, Epicurus, and the Stoics, a kind of social virtue from which even the selfishness of the Epicureans did not venture to free itself. Long before, and in all primitive societies, the sentiments of devotion to a friend, of sacrifice for a comrade in arms, were celebrated as noble and worthy of heroes. Friendship only flourishes in the midst of complete social activity, hence the Middle Agies were fatal to this sentiment. The commercialism of the present day is equally fatal to it, but the incontestable development of tendencies to solidarity favours it. No doubt the love of one's fellow-creatures in general, and the union of our destiny to theirs does not involve that freedom, confidence, expansion of feeling, and community of tendencies which make friendship. But friendship is at any rate the highest degree of human solidarity, and everything which contributes to the expansion of our generous nature is in favour of healthy rela- tions between men who have daily relations with each other. With Aristotle, and in spite of a different concep- tion of the value and of the r6le of woman, we do not consider love and friendship as incompatible. On the contrary, the love which is not allied with friendship, and which is only based on tendencies ^ Cf. Dugas, VAmitU antique^ Paris, Alcan. Aristotle thought that woman should be the friend of man, as I have shown in my course of Lectures at the College des Sciences Sociales in 1901. 328 THE FAMILY, FRIENDSHIP, ETC. which are very easy to satisfy, is only ephemeral. Friendship thus penetrates the family life, and when it is a question of children in the same household, it takes the name of fraternity. In fact, from the sociological and psychological points of view, there is no difference between the sentiments that brothers and friends experience for each other. There is the same confidence, devotion, and community of interests. For, if brothers have common family interests, friends have intellectual, aesthetical, and political interests in common; and if we compare the power of both from the point of view of the stability of the ties of affection, it must be admitted that the latter are more efficacious than the former, and that the former must be reinforced by the latter in order that the union of brothers may remain cordial and perfect. 1 60. Man in Relation to Animals. If fraternity, friendship, and family relations cannot make us forget the solidarity of all human beings, and must remain inseparable from the tendencies to the universal good, must not our widest humanitarian sentiments be reconciled with the sympathy which might be extended to the whole animal kingdom ? The struggle of man against the species which endanger his existence or his subsistence is lawful and necessary; but the torture that is sometimes inflicted on brutes and wild beasts is more than unnecessary; it is hateful, for it betrays low senti- ments and morbid tendencies to cruelty which are unworthy of man. It is sufficient for a race of reasonable beings to guard against the risks that their GENUINE HUMAN SENTIMENTS. 329 work may run, and the risks that they themselves may run, from the representatives of the lower species, different as they are from the most bloodthirsty and the most ferocious criminals, because of their incapacity to amend their ways and to approach even ever so slightly to the position of moral personalities. A fortiori it is unworthy of man to ill-treat the domestic animals which do him service and are his living instruments. Incidental considerations of a metaphysical order should bring us to see in these inferior brothers beings to be ever improved and raised above the level they have already attained, and therefore to be taken not only as means but also as ends. In this way the rights of the animal would be akin to those of the child. But a morality which has a psycho-sociological foundation would recognise real rights in beings with no real socia- bility; just as companies of animals can only be called " societies " by analogy, so the title of animals to our sympathy and to our benevolence can only be called rights by a distant analogy to the rights of reasonable beings. We have towards animals duties which are a part of human obligations properly so called. Animals have no rights over us, but we have rights over them on account of those duties of protection and bene- volence, etc., which we agree to fulfil, and especially because of the higher mission which man has under- taken to organise nature as a whole. 161. Genuine Human Sentiments. For the better fulfilment of this mission, humanity is profoundly distinguished from animality by the 330 THE FAMILY, FRIENDSHIP, ETC. development of the characteristic collective senti- ments of a reasonable being. In fact, nothing is of more importance than the systematisation of the common tendencies by which the social body imposes upon the individual certain inclinations and certain ways of thinking, feeling, and acting, which, in default of individual morality, none the less cause the elevation of the moral level in a nation or a race. For the individual to be almost without difficulty or effort courageous, clever, wise, and temperate, his environment must esteem all the virtues which he wishes to acquire. This environment must be for ever holding them up to his admiration, and must teach him nothing but aversion from vices such as brutality, theft, vengeance, hypocrisy, immodesty, intemperance, selfishness, etc. It is wrong to consider such qualities as frank- ness, veracity, modesty, boldness, sobriety, keen- ness for work, and faults such as dissimulation, effrontery, debauchery, and idleness as private virtues or vices, only having an indirect relation to social morality. In general, it is the predominant sentiments in the social environment that cause these individual qualities and defects. We see the vices that I have just mentioned rapidly extended in certain quarters, certain cities, or certain nations: hypocrisy — ^be- cause the popular sentiment being in favour of formalism imposes a feigned generosity on avari- cious or poor people, feigned nobility of mind on the mean spirited, feigned knowledge on the ignor- ant; debauchery — because luxury, commercial tend- encies, and a liking for inferior appetites, have GENUINE HUMAN SENTIMENTS. 33I succeeded in obliterating from the public mind the taste for beautiful things, for science, and for labour ; selfishness — either because the spirit of economy and of mediocrity has become general, or because com- petition has developed in a more or less extended circle the craving for material interests or success. And so with many other bad habits more or less harmful to collective morality. For the public virtues to be gathered into a single group like in- dividual virtues, for them to be closely connected one to the other, and for the development of the one to be concomitant with that of the rest, we must appeal to the most complex collective sentiment, and it can only fully exist in the common conscious- ness when all the others exist therein. Now, true charity is the love of one's fellows with a view to their continuous perfection ; true solidarity is that of beings united by a common nobility of sentiment. To be charitable in the widest sense of the word one must be very power- ful and virtuous. If the charitable sentiment is the predominant sentiment of a whole community, it cannot injure individual liberty, equality, or rights of any kind. Nothing that can injure the perfection of the individual and that of the community can be tolerated in that sentiment. For this lofty tendency to be satisfied, the scien- tific, critical, and aesthetic tendencies which lead to the possession of truth and artistic enjoyment) and which also have as their consequence veracity, frankness, independence of mind, and disinterested- ness in speculation and contemplation, must also as a preliminary be satisfied. When a city is proud of the wisdom and the 332 THE FAMILY, FRIENDSHIP, ETC. talents of its principal citizens it is already not very far from being virtuous. When the taste for in- struction, for the formation of the mind is developed in it, superstition, custom, and vile appetites are already on the decrease. Religious sentiments may sometimes have a happy influence; when they are pure, or inspired by metaphysical belief rather than by simple faith united with ignorance and super- stitious fear, they have an indisputable aesthetic and intellectual value, and their absence cannot but be harmful to the moral elevation of a city and of individuals. The search foi^ truth and the love of the beautiful can only be accompanied by tendencies to healthy and practical belief which cannot exist without courage, ardour, worth, firmness, and many other virtues which make man upright and strong, and the community powerful and honourable. The spirit of chivalry which springs from a vigilant opposition to everything that affects one's honour, and to everything which reveals the abuse of power, is the natural consequence of loyalty, courage, and generosity when these sentiments are held in honour in the community. As a correlative of this spirit in man we have in woman the sentiment of modesty and reserve, which is contrasted with the spirit of luxury or ostentation, and the gross manners in- spired by low inclinations. Modesty has increased as a collective sentiment in woman in proportion as civilisation has freed her from a despotism and from a very often degrading yoke. The more independence a woman has the more she must abstain from provoking in man those sensual feelings which are founded on a lack of respect for GENUINE HUMAN SENTIMENTS. 333 the moral person, and which have as their effect brutal aggressions or insidious tactics which are more characteristic of the lower animals. Moral dignity is imprinted on the chastity of the maid and the wife, and that is what makes it so valuable to the common conscience. When the public spirit allows without protest immodesty, debauchery, and pros- titution, the existence of the worst vices may be suspected. The spirit of moderation, tendencies to sobriety and frugality, on condition that they do not involve a reprehensible taste for mediocrity, constitute the very basis of public virtues. A people prone to excess in love and in hatred in its appetites and in its inclinations, lacks stability, and places an insuper- able obstacle in the way of all moral discipline. Thus, from the sentiments of moderation to the spirit of charity there is a hierarchy of collective tendencies, and the regular development and sub- ordination of these tendencies to a sublime sentiment of fraternity can alone assure social and individual morality. PART IV. THE STRUGGLE AGAINST IMMORALITY, I. Social Responsibility. 162. Conditions of Responsibility, Intention — 163. Errors of Appreciation — 164. Insufficient Deliberation — 165. Irresponsibility — 166. Possible Modification of the Character— 167, Impui ability — 168. Social Action, II. Sanction and Moral Education. 169. Rdle and Nature of Sanction — 170. Happiness the Natural Consequence of Moral Action^ 171. Merit — 172. The Immorality of Punishment— 17^. Utilitarian Rdle of Punishment — 174. Moral Suggestion. I. Social Responsibility. 162. Conditions of Responsibility. Intention.' We have now seen how individual and collective morality are each in turn subordinated to a system of tendencies, any defect in which involves crime, misdemeanour, or fault. For good actions to be accomplished, the individual, the State, the family, the association, the city, should be submitted in their evolution to certain rules which flow from a scientific conception of the social ideal as a whole ; 334 CONDITIONS OF RESPONSIBILITY. 335 each element or group must have its own tendency, but that tendency must be harmonised with the tendency of the whole. If it be not so, and if we may not hope that it will ever be so, — for no doubt there always will be in a system as complex as humanity disorders, abnormal facts, and reprehensible acts, — who are the guilty? and how are the guilty to be punished? or rather, if there are no guilty whom one ought to punish, on whom should fall the responsibility for misde- meanours, and what ought to be done to prevent repetition of the faults ? Let us first examine under what conditions responsibility is established. Moralists from the days of Kant have as a rule connected responsi- bility with intention. Let us then analyse this new fact. Kant endeavoured to reduce intention to moral respect, and this respect to a sentiment of dis- interestedness and humility in our ego, and of admiration for the moral law.-^ Besides, Kant perceived little in the throng of motives antagonistic to morality but egoism and presumption (self-love and self-satisfaction). In that case, the moral idea can only consist of an antagonistic sentiment which is also but slightly complex.^ Moral intention in the psychological processus must be replaced by voluntary deliberation, so that we may see simultaneously its variability and its importance. The vague sentiment of doing one's ^ Cf. "The springs of pure practical reason," Kritik of Practical Reason, 3 Ibid^y p. 130. 336 SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. duty cannot satisfy us. We desire to fulfil a deter- mined obligation, and as far as possible to fulfil all the obligations the totality of which gives us a function in the social system. Now can we simul- taneously perceive all our obligations? can we under given circumstances think of the manifold duties which are incumbent upon us? Is not the time for the deliberation which is at our disposal for evoking our different obligations almost always too short considering the weakness of our intellect; and are we not in a large number of cases conscious of our limited aptitude to examine every side of a question, and to judge of all the consequences which immediately result from our acts ? (I do not speak of remote consequences, most of which escape us.) And does there not follow from this intellectual incapacity a sentiment, almost of melancholy, which makes us decide to act while we are fully conscious of running a risk, the risk of self-deception? But another sentiment immediately springs into being by contrast, that of having done as much as possible to diminish the importance of the risk that is run. Those who are not conscious of their relative intellectual weakness, of their incapacity to perceive all the consequences of their decision, do not ex- perience this feeling of risk. They have no anxiety beyond the sphere of the effects foreseen. For these effects to be accepted, and for their cause to be admitted with moral intention as the end of the voluntary act, they must satisfy certain tendencies. Now it very rarely happens that this is a simple desire for systematic action, purely moral, and con- stituting the whole intention. It may happen that certain tendencies, some generous, others selfish. ERRORS OF APPRECIATION. 337 some ^esthetic, and others quite inferior, may all share in the voluntary determination and combine their influence. Frequently one desire appears as pre- dominant and masks the importance of others, less lofty or quite different, which also urge to action, and are inseparable from moral intention pro- perly so called. And further, the desire for rational ends, for action morally good, may appear in us after selfish desires or appetites of an inferior order have already determined our choice, and when the^ moral intention is only a cloak under which are dis- guised quite different intentions, of which our con- science is the dupe. What is then in this case the value of intention from the point of view of the responsibility of the agent ? Shall we say that because the intention was good, because the agent sincerely believed that he was doing his duty, he is not responsible for the fatal consequences of his choice ? Is it not far better to see the real motives of the voluntary decision, and ought we not to consider the efficient factors rather than the apparent factor ? 163. Errors of Appreciation. How many people are deceived as to the moral value of the ends which they propose to themselves, and of the desires which urge them to propose to themselves such ends. The old Socratic doctrine which declared that no one was voluntarily wicked, borrows some force from this consideration. Few men are conscious of the baseness of their motives, and almost all are under an illusion as to the real motives of their voluntary 22 338 SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. . * decisions. How can a being, born amid prostitution, brought up in the low quarters of a great town, — how can he, in his physical and moral degeneration, conceive as immoral the highest tendencies that he has ever known within him, tendencies which, in reality and for a man in other circumstances, would be gross appetites ? Would he not abandon himself to these inferior tendencies, which, to be curbed, require the most elevated inclinations and com- plete self-control, because he ignores inclinations which have proved to be the moral safeguard of others ? It may be objected that he knows perfectly well that he is doing wrong. The proof of it is in his dissimulation. He hides himself in order that he may gratify his grosser appetites*. We are too often deceived in this matter. The being that is inferior from the moral point of view sometimes flees from social reprobation, sometimes fears the police, and knows that he is acting contrary to the prescriptions of law and morals ; but either he cannot resist his all-powerful appetites — he is obsessed by them, and must give way to more and more violent impulses — or he hates the society that he fears, he mocks at morals that he cannot understand, and he breaks the law in which he sees only a formula of oppres- sion, and not an expression of moral obligation.^ In the first case he must be satisfied by the struggle, although it cannot issue in an effective ^ This is the case with a young man named N , who was condemned at the Assizes of Orne for indecent assault, and who was declared responsible for his acts because he hid himself in order to give way to his instincts as an inferior being. He was unanimously considered to be ** unintelligent." ERRORS OF APPRECIATION. 339 abstention from wrong. This delinquent or criminal is not voluntarily wicked, but is so against his will. In the second case he hides himself, and flees before a force superior to his own ; but he does not see in that force anything moral; he does not see in his own ends anything wrong or immoral. If he does not know what is forbidden, he does not understand why it is forbidden. He does not therefore do wrong in order to do wrong; he does it because what we call wrong is nevertheless to him the best thing that he can think of. The man with really evil intentions, the criminal who refrains from doing good because it is good, who struggles against social institutions because they are the creations of public morality, who slays, robs, and slanders in order to assert the wickedness of which he is conscious, and which he knowingly fosters within him, — has such a being as this, a being abnormal in the highest degree, ever existed ? If, therefore, we ought only to be responsible for crime when it has been committed with evil intention, we never would be responsible. Moralists who have made of intention the foundation of responsibility have therefore considered as contrary to good inten- tion any passion, tendency, desire, or appetite, other than disinterestedness and respect for the law of duty. But how many acts useful to society, useful to the development of a moral, social, or individual system, are due to tendencies or even to appetites which have not been accompanied by any sentiment of respect or disinterestedness ? Must they therefore be con- demned? and if it is absurd to consider them as immoral, where will immorality in intention begin ? 34<5 SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. There will probably be only amorality. There will only be two categories of beings — moral beings and amoral beings. 164. Insufficient Deliberation. If, when we wish to attain an end and make our arrangements to that effect, we realise an end that could not be foreseen, this is called accident (the identical definition given by Aristotle), chance, fatality. In it there is no merit, nor is there crime, misdemeanour, or fault. And this is much more the case when the consequences might have been fore- seen, although they were not. The sportsman who fires into a public thicket where he must have known there may be other sportsmen, commits an act of serious imprudence. His deliberation has been in- sufficient. He has not summed up certain motives for not firing into the thicket, and he ought to have done so for his act to be marked as the result of the exercise of reasonable will. If he has done so, and yet the desire of firing was the stronger ; if the fear of an accident vanished from his mind or barely arose, his responsibility is even greater than before. He ought to have fortified in his mind the motive of abstaining, strengthened it by fresh motives, and fixed his attention on this important point. But if in the first case the fear of accident has not arisen, and if in the second case it has not persisted, the psychologist ought to discover why. Perhaps the sportsman was not intelligent enough to em- bark upon such subtle considerations. Perhaps he lacked generous sentiments, or was urged not INSUFFICIENT DELIBERATION. 34I to prolong his reflection and deliberation by his selfishness, or by his levity, or by the simple at- traction of pleasure. If he lacked intelligence or feelings, if the impulse to seek a pleasure destroyed in him all power of reflection, and inhibited every antagonistic tendency, and if, although it was morally his duty to deliberate in a certain manner, and psychologically he was unable to do so because of his mental debility, what becomes of his responsi- bility? Is it greater than that of the dog which, while playing with a little child, upsets it on the ground and seriously injures it ? In most cases, when the course of deliberation is too hastily interrupted, it is at a given moment, and either the circumstances require an immediate solu- tion, or perhaps we have reached one of those states of consciousness which can persist during a certain time, and which ai*e marked as halting-places in the course of the mental processus. Why at this moment does action begin to succeed to speculation, instead of allowing the latter to continue ? Is it due to a kind of intellectual lassitude? In certain cases it might, in fact, be too fatiguing for the mind to continue to deliberate and to discuss the pros and cons. In most cases there is probably an impatience to issue from a painful state of indecision. Here it is that the character plays a considerable part ; accord- ing as one is quick or slow, ardent or temperate, the painful sentiment which accompanies every de- liberation leads more or less quickly to a solution which is very often hasty in the first case, and sometimes too slow to arrive in the second. How can a man be considered responsible for 342 SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. the temperament and the character which thus determine his hasty choice? No doubt a means of making ourselves responsible for a check midway can be imagined. It is said that, if we are free, our liberty consists in not allowing our choice to be fixed until after a certain interval of deliberation ; thus, Malebranche believed that owing to liberty, "the impulse that we have to- wards the universal good is not entirely checked by a particular good. The mind is urged to go further. . . . Liberty consists in being able to sus- pend its judgment and its love, and later think of other things, and therefore love other forms of good."i But Malebranche conceived a limit to this pro- gress of the mind in the consideration of good. It was a question of reaching by liberty "that which contains all good " ; so that liberty and love of good being synonymous, a strong tendency to satisfy God, was the exact equivalent of liberty in the system of Malebranche. This tendency might be more or less powerful, and according to its power in each being, Male- branche conceived those beings as more or less free. In the same way we have recognised in every man a strong tendency to systematic action, to conduct that is quite coherent in itself and well co-ordinated with that of all its fellows in view of a common end. According to the power that this tendency has in him, the moral agent pursues his deliberations, more or less at length, with the object of only adopting a decision that is in conformity with his reason. Is that liberty ? and can one be said to be responsible ^ Recherche de la Verite^ Vol. i., Bk. i., Chap. i. IRRESPONSIBILITY. 343 because one has weaker or stronger tendencies, because one has a more or less marked taste for systematic activity qua an individual and moral being ? ^ We must, in particular, remark that here is an essential tendency, one of those that some of the habits instilled by education or acquired by pro- longed effort cannot succeed in establishing within us. We are born more or less reasonable, more or less adapted to moral activity, just as we are born more or less able to represent to ourselves colours or sounds. And so it is with all those lofty tendencies which we have recognised as indispensable to morality, the sum-total of which, as we have seen, forms the moral character. Are we responsible for the absence within us of a generous tendency which would serve as an antagonistic reducer to a low passion ? But then the question presents itself as to how far we share in the recognised irresponsibility of the insane. 165. Irresponsibility. This is one of the most important questions in morality. For if vice is a natural product like sugar * Besides, experience shows that prolonged deliberation is sometimes injurious to rational action. There are people who cannot make up their minds to take a side, who are ever summoning up new ends and feelings in contrary directions, so that the conception of the act is modified while the clearly conscious desires become enfeebled, while appetites are obscured, and while tendencies assume greater and greater authority. Thus we reach the state in which we no longer decide for clear and assignable reasons, for reasons capable of being formulated into judgments and reasonings of objective value, but simply by sentiments, by a kind of impulse rising like a huge wave from the depths of the unconscious. 344 SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. and vitriol, if it no longer depends on men to re- main virtuous and to become vicious any more than it depends on them to remain healthy-minded or to become insane; a fortiori, if certain unfortunate creatures are born criminals just as others are born mad, or of incurable mental weakness; if misde- meanour is always or almost always inevitable, what is the use of morality ? what is the good of a theory which proposes to us an ideal and rules of systematic conduct, which we necessarily misunderstand, and the more inevitably as we are nearer in the psychic hierarchy to that inferior degree which corresponds to the maximum of moral insanity ? The intimate relation between crime and degeneration is, how- ever, more and more probable. If we distinguish, in scientific environments, between morbid and ordinary crime, it is no doubt because of the medico-legal pre- occupations of most alienists who are compelled, in the presence of a criminal, to give an opinion as to his irresponsibility, and in general as to his confine- ment in a lunatic asylum, or as to his responsibility with the legal consequences that it involves. They must therefore arbitrarily establish a certain degree of intellectual and affective trouble above which the delinquents are declared responsible, and the princi- pal difficulty of their task lies exactly in that arbitrary determination. The motives for impulsive crime are grasped easily enough, and from the moment they are grasped we excuse the wrongdoing to that extent ; but we no longer can grasp the motives of a crime that is committed in cold blood. There we see the intervention of will, and admit a much greater culpability; but the voluntary crime and the im^ pulsive crime are alike determined by a motive. The IRRESPONSIBILITY, 345 surprising thing is that the act in the first corresponds to so sUght an interest, whereas in the second, impulse has given so great an interest to the wrong that has been done. One is surprised to see that to procure a transient pleasure for the petty satisfaction of self-love, or even for less still, a prolonged delibera- tion may have issued in lavish precaution and skill in the execution of a cleverly conceived design. And is not this precisely the sign of the pathologi- cal character of such an action and such a mental processus? We are presented with a kind of dilemma: either the interest was considerable, and in that case the crime is similar to impulsive crime — the crime and the criminal are alike pathological ; or there is practically no interest, and then the action becomes inexplicable by the determining causes of normal action, and the crime is pathological. For how can we admit that except from mental aberration a reasonable being prefers an act which, if it were normal, would be opposed by his social tendencies and the sentiments that are innate in him and developed by education ? He cannot therefore experience those sentiments which in healthy-minded men serve as a counterpoise to tendencies to offensive action. Or will it again be objected that the influence of the will is capable of keeping the attention freely on the motive which, it would have seemed, ought to have been the weaker, and which thus becomes the more powerful ? The hypothesis of a free will capable of arbitrarily modifying the natural play which constitutes deliberation is, as I have said, a metaphysical hypothesis which, like all similar hypo- theses, has the grave inconvenience of introducing an 346 SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. entity, the will, which we can only indicate without exact definition. Science ought to be content with facts and laws, and the factors of will are, as we have seen, choices determined by the nature of the char- acter and by the tendencies essential to the individual. If, therefore, a motive that is very feeble in upright and honourable people is suddenly found in an in- dividual to have the support of his whole ego, so far as to reduce to nil the effect of all other motives, and to orientate in a criminal direction the processus of deliberation which issues in his so-called free choice, is not the character of that individual exceptional and abnormal in the highest degree? Is not this indi- vidual a being of a fundamentally pathological nature ? We thus come back to what we said before, namely, that he lacks tendencies that are indispensable to the normal being, and that among those essential tend- encies are not to be found those which he ought to experience in order to have a normal nature. 166. Possible Modification of the Character. Can it have tendencies, and, having them, can they be preserved ? Not having them, can it desire to acquire them ? These questions require further examination as to the way in which the man may lose or acquire essential tendencies, tendencies dominating his mental evolution, or in all cases strong enough to direct his conduct. Can it happen by his own effort alone, and in virtue of his own choice ? Yes, undoubtedly it can, on condition that it is by the development or natural transformation of pre-existing tendencies and fundamental appetites. But if these elements or rudiments do not pre-exist. POSSIBLE MODIFICATION OF THE CHARACTER. 347 neither natural effort nor even education can bring them into being, and the individual we are consider- ing must then be classed among the morally insane whose moral debility is congenital. On the other hand, moral tendencies are so com- plex that at first they may be affected by a slow dissolution of the personality, and nothing can prevent their natural decay or their ultimate dis- appearance. Here then is a being, apparently provided with free-will, but to whom deliberation and will are no longer of any use from the moral point of view, and on whom only quite simple impulses make any impression. You call him a responsible criminal. He is already, although it is not apparent, nearly related to the " morally insane.'* The impulsive man may be of a less morbid nature. Passion, in fact, is inhibitive to tendencies that it cannot subordinate to itself. It does not destroy them, and when it has passed away it may leave dominant the very tendencies that it had over- shadowed. Its development, up to the paroxysm that is sometimes so fatal, can only be due to an excessive compliance in the subject with certain of these inclinations or certain of his appetites to an indolence which certain situations and certain circum- stances encourage. The impulsive criminal would be able in most cases to escape from the thraldom of passion by an energetic intervention of his will, that is to say, by an appeal to all the tendencies of his character — tendencies which may be normal, and which in their totality are the constituents of a normal nature. If he had been accustomed to self- control he might have avoided his crime. He is therefore more guilty than the man who finds within 348 SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. himself in the depths of his being, however pro- longed his deliberation may be, no tendencies capable of opposing an abnormal desire. It is right to say that voluntary crimes reveal a fundamentally vicious temperament, while impulsive crimes are generally committed by occasional mis- demeanants. But for that very reason degenerates of every kind, attacked by a more or less characteristic moral insanity, must be brought into close relation with the authors of voluntary crimes. As for the impulsive, they are also morbid, for the impulse which leads to crime can only be developed and become omnipotent in a being in whom mental instability, and, in particular, the instability of tendencies, is already great enough to constitute a serious blemish. Therefore criminals, to whatever class they may belong, must be considered as diseased ; they either have lacked stability in the tendencies that are characteristic of a responsible man, or they have suffered a check in their develop- ment, or a reversion which has deprived them of some of those tendencies, while it weakens their power and causes them to disappear, and to make way for others which have very soon become morbid.^ 167. Imputahility. But, many moralists will object, if we go back 1 this way from responsibility to responsibility, 167. Imputahility. ^ mo in this way ^ In fact, it is ascertained that criminals in general present a morbid exaggeration of tendencies either of nutrition, or reproduction, or the preservation of the personal existence, or of some of the tendencies derived from these. That is why M. Lacassagne divided criminals into three categories— frontal, parietal, and occipital— according to the supposed localisation of the different tendencies. IMPUTABILITV. 349 imputability ends by being lost in the waves of an indefinitely remote past, and of a totality of circum- stances indefinitely remote. We must therefore distinguish between moral responsibility and im- putability. .We have already seen that if the partisans of liberty reap nothing from ignorance as far as the point of departure of our character is concerned, neither can it profit those who prefer to argue from fatality or universal determinism in order to excuse their errors. The legislator and the moral agent have both the right and the duty of considering the positive datum of a primitive characteristic which is irreducible, and which is the origin of the acts accomplished by the personality. It is to this character, which is at once the starting-point and the point of departure (the effect of manifold influences of sociological, psycho- logical, biological, physico-chemical, and mechanical influences, but the immediate cause of new series of phenomena which could not have appeared without the constitution of a fresh personality), that we must at first look for the reason of a crime or mis- demeanour. If it were committed through weakness of tendencies or character, we might ask the agent to strengthen what is best in him, what ought to become predominant; and if he does not do so, although he has the power, he is responsible for the crimes which his weakness involves. If the crime were committed through fundamental wickedness and through baseness of that character which is a product of factors, does that mean that he has no responsibility? No doubt, the individual has none; but because a morally insane person can no longer xesist his impulses or cannot actually give to his 350 SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. accurate reasonings the practical consequences which they imply, does it follow that society could not, by commencing at a sufficiently early stage a specialised education, give this patient the means of avoiding crime, develop in him healthier sentimei^Jts, and give to his sensibility and to his practical judgment an impulse of another kind ? 1 68. Social Action. It is objected, that from their earliest years many of the morally insane have been incurably unrespon- sive to educative action. But is not this because the education they have received has not been in the least suitable to their temperament and their character ? And is it not also because the education received by criminals who are not considered insane has been insufficient, incomplete, ill directed, and too early abandoned, that they have committed a crime which perhaps their temperament, left to its free development, has rendered inevitable?^ What the individual is powerless to determine or to check in himself, the community may create or prevent by the means at its disposal, so powerful is their action on the individual mind. Society no doubt is also subject to a determinism; but we can clearly see whence, in decadent communities, in a process of dissolution or morbid evolution, comes the stimulus or the check that these communities no longer find in themselves. In fact there are always, ^ It is sufficient here to point out the complete absence, at any rate in France, of asylums for the treatment of criminals of limited re- sponsibility, in order to show how remote we are from the time when an appropriate education will be given to degenerates who are pre- disposed to priminal action. SOCIAL ACTION. 351 side by side with communities of a given tempera- ment, communities of a different spirit whose quite different future influences the future of neighbouring communities. A nation or a race exercises its happy or unhappy influence on another nation or on another race, and there is an incessant overlapping of actions and reactions between the different societies in the world; and this causes social determinism to differ in other respects from the inevitableness which involves an irremediable collective decadence. Hence for individuals there are remedies and pre- ventives of social origin, just as there are remedies and preventives for families, cities, and nations in the wider communities of which these elementary communities form a part. (For this subject vide my treatise on the social causes of insanity, a criticism of too narrow a conception of sociological degeneration.) Now if there are incurable criminals, there is no social incurability. Humanity can amend itself indefinitely by destroying in its midst all the social causes of mental insanity, of moral insanity, of psychological debility, and of instability or morbid stability of the mind. No doubt a collectivity cannot move more rapidly than the present state of its civilisation permits. The moralising power that it may exercise over itself is certainly limited; but it can make no mistake when there is ah increase in- stead of a progressive decrease of criminality and immorality. When there is an increase in the number and the importance of misdemeanours and crimes, we may fearlessly assert the very wide responsibility of society with regard to individual faults. The question is how to find out what remedies 352 SANCTION AND MORAL EDUCATION. and preventives of social origin will have an effect on criminals or delinquents, — if not on all, at least on most of them, and certainly on a special category of social beings. II. Sanction and Moral Education. 169. The Role and Nature of Sanction. Since men come to a decision under the influence of sentiments much more than of the conclusions of pure reason, and since there must always be with the directing idea a rather strong tendency to make the idea effectively directing, to such a point that the keenest intelligence can do nothing for the morality of an agent when his sentiments are bad and irremediably low, — since this is so, it is quite fair to appeal to means drawn from the psychology of the sentiments to give to the civil law a power over the mind, a power which it does not hold from the simple enunciation of the prescription. Thus all legislatures have sanctioned rules of con- duct which they promulgate by penal dispositions involving pain to the delinquent in the case of non- observation of the law. The fear of pain has seemed from all time to be the most efficacious motive that it is possible to awaken in the mind of man with a view to the accomplishment of his social duties. Ipso facto the idea of sanction has been intimately associated with that of pain or its contrary — reward. However, it is possible to arouse other motives than the desire of reward or the fear of punishment. THE r6le and nature OF SANCTION. 353 According to circumstances we may appeal to the aesthetic, family, or civic sentiments, to sympathetic emotions, and to generous tendencies. The law may present itself together with considerations capable of stirring the heart and of impressing that law pro- foundly on the mind. It may be reinforced in its authority by the respect that is inspired by its very origin; instead of being a simple prescription, often apparently arbitrary, it may be presented as the very consequence of certain effective desires. In fact, laws are generally respected because of the fear inspired by the thought of reprisals, exercised by the chief or the caste which issued the rules of common conduct. Men have governed men as they govern animals, much more by force than by per- suasion. Besides, pain has another origin than the desire of sanctioning a law; punishment and crime existed before written law and judicial forms. The breaking of traditions, acts opposed to prejudices, customs, and to the tendencies of primitive people, all involved violent reactions of the multitude against the individual. Death frequently followed the slightest breach of the tacit prescriptions of a people or of a caste. The rigour of penal reactions seems to us to de- crease in the course of civilisation. Stoning to death has disappeared. Lynching tends to disappear, and, among all civilised races, is no longer considered as anything but collective crime. But the State, sub- stituting itself for the impulsive, blind, and unjust mob, prone to every kind of excess, has given to pain the character of impulsive reaction which it has joined to that of legal sanction; hence has followed a constant confusion in the conception of 23 354 SANCTION AND MORAL EDUCATION. the part that pain should play. Punishment has been considered as a means of reparation, as a necessary consequence of crime, just as reward would be considered the necessary consequence of merit. Kant would attribute all the energy of this belief in the necessity of reward or punishment to the consequcfice of good or evil action. He does not think that the fear of punishment or the hope of reward is a motive to virtuous action ; but he considers almost as an a priori synthetic proposition the assertion that vice should be punished and virtue rewarded. No opinion could be more arbitrary. Nowhere perhaps in morality is more clearly to be seen the influence of long tradition on the concepts of prac- tical reason. Because an impulsive reaction, cruel or kind, favourable or unfavourable, has always followed in partially civilised humanity the action that is considered criminal, or the action considered good (that is to say, contrary to, or in conformity with, the beliefs and prejudices of the multitude), we therefore believe in the rational necessity of such a sequence of facts, and claim to make of God the fittest means to realise this so-called supreme end: the correspondence of happiness and virtue, of suffer- ing and vice. M. Paul Janet has tried to justify this conception by basing it on the idea of distributive justice. From the moment that good and evil may be apportioned to man, it is right that they should be distributed proportionately to the merits and according to the moral value of each. But there is a preliminary question: is there, outside the good which the aptitude of each to secure it for himself submits THE CONSEQUENCE OF MORAL ACTION. 355 to an equitable redivision, other goods which are independent of technical aptitudes, as far as their acquisition is concerned ? If so — if, for example, there were reason for admitting the existence after death of a life in which joy would be granted in a measure wide, or average, or slight, we conceive that distri- butive justice requires the redivision of this good according to moral merit. But in our present ex- istence we see that happiness, if it is not always acquired by moral virtue, is in general obtained by those who are skilful in procuring their own advan- tage. It is not true that the good are always un- happy, and especially is it not true that moral value is doomed never to procure real happiness by its own efforts on earth. 170. Happiness the Natural Consequence oj Moral Action. No doubt we do not content ourselves with the satisfaction procured by duty accomplished. The Stoics were wrong in believing that virtue was its own reward, and in considering all material good, all other joys than purely moral joys, as indifferent. Happiness, from wherever it may spring, is to be esteemed and to be desired, provided it is not in- jurious to individual or social perfection. The moral being may lawfully claim his share of pleasure, his share of material well-being, and of intellectual, aesthetic, and social satisfaction. Why then does he not sometimes obtain it ? Is it not because, in spite of his excellent intentions, he does not succeed in playing the part which might procure for him the satisfactions which he is entitled 356 SANCTION AND MORAL EDUCATION. to desire ? We are wrong if we separate skill from integrity. It will be sufficient to distinguish between those who are skilful without being honourable, and those who are both honourable and skilful, that is to say, those who can find the means best fitted for the realisation of their moral ends, who discover imme- diately how inferior is integrity without skill, although that is preferable to skill without morality. ' To be a moral being we need not be an innocent being, a dupe or a victim. All we ask is to be a being of our own time and environment, no doubt so as to be a factor of progress for one's environment, but also so that we may adapt ourselves to the con- ditions of existence in which we are placed. If a virtuous man living a solitary life is ignorant of a series of joys which are well known to the wicked, he can only blame himself for his inferiority from the point of view of happiness. If, instead of hoping for reward in a future life in return for the privations which he endures in his present existence, he would force himself all the more to become a social being, useful to his fellows, in solidarity with his fellow- citizens, he would be in solidarity with them in pleasure as well as in pain ; and he would very soon perceive that if in the present social system it fre- quently happens that the ungodly triumph and that the good suffer, the fault often lies with the good who do not know how to work on behalf of collective virtue. When one is too engrossed to acquire private virtues, which can only have value in so far as they are a condition of public virtues ; when we deliberately forget our fellows and only think of our own perfec- tion, we are punished by the doom of the ages — the THE CONSEQUENCE OF MORAL ACTION. 357 unhappiness of the good amid the happiness of the wicked. It is then because the good are not good enough that they are unhappy. It is because their goodness is too passive, their virtue not sufficiently active, that they see happiness flee from them. They have not sufficiently deserved it. All the efforts of social beings ought to tend to the realisation of a social order from which injustice is progressively eliminated, in which the harmful effects of wickedness are more or less attenuated, in which the scale of moral values, which is in addition the scale of social values when it is a question of persons, corresponds exactly to the scale of good and pleasure. What is there more natural than to see health procured by temperance, regularity of employment and well-being procured by professional skill, esteem and honours resulting from persevering integrity, and from the affection and the devotion of one's fellows — which are the reward of services rendered to the common cause, and therefore to individual causes. What is it, then, which prevents the moral man from being happy? Accidents, social disturbance, physi- cal and moral contagion — in short, the effects of fortuitous occurrences due to the complexity of social relations and the effects of universal solidarity. But man becomes more and more the master of nature and eliminates the disastrous consequences of that chance of which the ancients made a God, because it was more dreaded by them than by us ; and more and more also does moral solidarity, the voluntary consensus of reasonable beings, replace the primitive solidarity, which was certainly more dangerous than productive of moral results. 358 SANCTION AND MORAL EDUCATION. The optimism to which we may abandon ourselves has nothing in common with theological or meta- physical optimism; it is not based on subjective beliefs or on an arbitrary conception of the world. Facts are its foundation — the progress of science and the progress of intelligent solidarity. We may therefore hope that by incessant effort (for moral optimism far from enervating and weakening, far from giving confidence to the idle who might trust in an inevitable evolution, excites the energies and stimulates to action), by a persistent desire to realise a social system which becomes more and more unified, we shall eventually bring into agreement both nature and morality, and secure happiness for the good. But, once more, the acquisition of happiness will be the natural consequence of the skill exhibited, of the ability with which the moral being will reach his ends. It will not therefore be a sanction in the sense in which sanction was understood by classical philo- sophy. It will be rather what is sometimes under- stood by ** natural sanction." It is far better simply to say that this will be a natural result of increasing morality. In the same way the suffering which will result to the unskilful and the dishonest, from the privation of the good and the pleasure that a more systematic conduct would have certainly secured for them, will not be a sanction or a punishment, but the simple result of their immorality in the midst of increasing morality. 171. Merit. The ideas of merit and demerit have only a relation to the natural consequences of good or evil MERIT. 359 action in so far as we can imagine a social state different from that in which the agent resides, a social state ensuring results the best adapted to the import- ance of the cause. We may be convinced that man will always imagine a social organisation superior to that which he enjoys. The idea of the Elysian Fields and of Paradise, as ancient perhaps as man himself, is far from disappearing from the human consciousness. At most it may be secularised, and become the idea of a physical and social environ- ment, more in conformity to the moral ideal. So that if we no longer conceive the man of high moral value as deserving greater pleasure in heaven, he will be conceived as deserving it in a better terrestrial world. As for the wicked, he will be considered less and less worthy to live in this better world ; and just as in our days the Catholic generally expels him from heaven and plunges him into hell, so, perhaps, lay opinion will claim to expel him from the society of the future. But these are only the very natural con- sequences of the conception of an ideal of common life. To deserve to be admitted into the Republic of Plato, or into the city of God or into a future humanity, there to enjoy the pleasure of the wise and the happiness of the virtuous being, is the desire of the moral being who works for the realisation of this ideal of collective existence. Not to deserve it is the characteristic of the wicked, who does not trouble his head about such a realisation. Does not this go far to realise the classical theory, according to which to every moral act must be added a reward, and to every immoral act a punishment ? according to which the good deserves to be rewarded beyond the natural consequences of his good action, 360 SANCTION AND MORAL EDUCATION. and the wicked deserves to suffer beyond the suffering that his misdoing may naturally cause to him ? 172. The Immorality of Punishment. Is it not even immoral and inhuman to assert that the sum of suffering which weighs upon humanity must be increased by punishments ? How can the death of a criminal and the tortures inflicted upon him be moral ? Is it not a relic of barbarism to conceive of the pain of the delinquent as well deserved ? And besides, what is this multitude which crowds around the foot of the scaffold and claps its hands, and laughs, and sings when the knife falls ? Is it not the ignoble mob issuing from the low quarters of our great towns, bearing all the stigmata of degeneration, and exhibiting a well-marked rever- sion to the most brutal ancestral type, in our civilised eyes the most monstrous type of all ? Should we not therefore be ashamed of ourselves when the old leaven of animal cruelty gives rise in us to thoughts and sentiments of reprisal with respect to the criminal, and when our heart is not touched by the sufferings inflicted upon the delinquent ? To make him suffer who has made others suffer, to be cruel towards the man who has been cruel, is to multiply the wrong instead of healing the wound. It is adding to the individual fault a social fault, and putting the criminal in the position of a man on whom vile vengeance is taken.^ Let the man who has done the wrong help to repair it. Let him make good the public and private mischief that he ' Cf. A. France, Les Idles dej. Coignard, UTILITARIAN ROLE OF PUNISHMENT. 361 has caused. That is the principle of contractual justice which tends to prevail in our days, because obligations tend to become more and more exact now that they are stipulated in contracts. There always are cases in which the public injury caused by a criminal cannot be estimated. Violation of the law is much more pernicious because it tends to the destruction of the social edifice, than because it in- volves injury that may be valued. Therefore we must endeavour above all to prevent the tendency to violate the law and the moral precept from being generalised, for this would render social life im- possible. 173. Utilitarian Role of Punishment, Perhaps then punishment may be really a sanction, that is to say, the means of reinforcing the influence of the law on the mind of him who deliberates, chooses, and acts. By arousing in the mind the fear of punishment we create a new motive to action or inhibition ; but this sanction, which is purely utilitarian, is the last means to which society can have recourse to influence or restrain the individual. It is the complement of an insufficient education or an education which has not brought forth all its fruit. It is therefore important that punishment should be inflicted only if its influence will be effective on the mind of the subject who deliberates, and that only that kind of punishment should be inflicted which will exercise an effective influence on a given mind. If this be done the punishment of the insane will cease, because they are incapable of reflection ; and so 362 SANCTION AND MORAL EDUCATION. with idiots, who are imbeciles incapable of action with a motive, not so much because they are not responsible or because fault is not imputable to them, but because no sanction has any influence on them. The child who has committed a fault through bewilderment, the young man, the adult, the old man, who have let themselves be dragged into crime through impulse, and have thereby shown that they lack an inner restraint and sufficient power of self-control, profit by the punishment that is inflicted upon them. As for the morally insane, who commit voluntary crimes, who accomplish the most abomin- able acts with the greatest sang froid — and that, as we have seen, from lack of lofty sentiments, from a pathological absence of tendencies to social life — it may sometimes be useful, and even absolutely neces- sary, that the civil or moral law should appear to them to be sanctioned, and that its violation should be conceived of by them as eminently disastrous. How many people are there in the most civilised society without fear of police or prison, and who, because they lack generous tendencies and noble sentiments, let themselves drift into excess, im- morality, misdemeanour, and crime ? They are like the morally insane in the sense that they lack certain inclinations characteristic of the moral being, although they differ from the delinquent or criminal lunatic in the sense that their impulses or obsessions do not so inevitably issue in the doing of wrong. In number they are legion, and that is why it seems that fear, the only motive capable of exer- cising an effective influence on their voluntary- decisions, must be inspired, in most human beings UTILITARIAN ROLE OF PUNISHMENT. 363 by the establishment of punishments sanctioning the laws. Does this imply that a haunting dread is the sole instrument by which respect for the laws and the doing of one's duty is wholly and always to be impressed on humanity ? Does it mean that the fear of the police, or that the fear of the Lord, will be the last word of the wisdom of multitudes ? If the former, we must teach the people that the most terrible punishments in this world and the next await the delinquent, or we must at any rate attach to virtue so many rewards and to vice such punish- ment that appetite and fear will become the most powerful motives to human actions. This means, a real " morality of slaves " ; it means that fear must dominate man. But is fear a normal sentiment ? Is it not one of those pathological sentiments which disturb the intellect and paralyse action. If we undertake to establish a morality having as its end the normal functioning of the psycho-sociological being we ought only to provisionally admit an abnormal mental state. Now the effects of dread are known. Those of fear are none the less known. It is sufficient to see the habitual attitude and the state of heart and mind to which young people are brought who are subject to a terrible discipline, to be under no illusion as to the value of a morality that is based on dread. The man who fears is either a being resigned to apathy, or a sly creature, a secret rebel, who only waits for a favourable opportunity to escape the obligations imposed upon him by a master whom he hates. As M. Richard^ has said, the State progresses by 1 Rev. PhiLf 1899, t. ii., pp. 475 ei seq. 364 SANCTION AND MORAL EDUCATION. economising constraint and by soliciting the obedi- ence of the individual to the requirements of col- lective life, appealing to other motives than fear. There is a general tendency to avoid imprisoning children capable of improvement. In England we send them to Reformatory Schools, in France to Houses of Correction, which are unfortunately too badly organised to give happy results. The law of reprieve is inspired by a wise mistrust of the fatal consequences of imprisonment and by a belief, which has been proved justified, in the happy effects of a severe warning. Let the prison of the near future be transformed into an asylum for the moral health. We have seen that responsibility for crime is made incumbent on a nature that has been given to the delinquent, on a character which can only be reformed by the very person who acted, and can only act, according to his own character; thus the criminal, the delinquent, and the immoral being are defective beings. Society should defend itself against their attacks without anger, and protect itself as it would against the possible wrong-doing of a dog, a horse, or any of our "inferior brethren." To prevent the repetition of crimes and misdemeanours which have been com- mitted in spite of preventive measures, we must first of all prevent the evil-doer from continuing to set a bad example — ^just as we should prevent an epileptic from falling too frequently into his crises in the presence of hysterical subjects, who would be only too ready to imitate him. We must therefore take pains with the delinquent and not restore him to liberty until he is cured, until he has lessened the violence of his passions or the power of his disastrous UTILITARIAN r6lE OF PUNISHMENT. 365 tendencies, until he has really. grown wiser and has not been brought, as happens too often, to a state of mere hypocrisy by ill treatment and by fear. Let us not forget that all minds are not accessible to fear. In the first place, there are degenerates whom no punishment can terrify, and who experience a kind of pleasure in bearing the chastisement and the humili- ation which would cause in others bitter pangs. There are also strong men, courageous men, whom fear and suffering cannot check, and to whom pun- ishment cannot constitute a sanction qualified to re- inforce the power of the law. In such people quite different sentiments must be evoked if we wish to determine them to moral conduct. To some the awakening of an appetite, to others conformity of action to a strong tendency, will be sufficiently powerful a feeling or end to determine the suit- able choice. Educators know it well. Each child must be attacked on his "sensitive side" to bring him to what we desire. Adults are for the most part but great children. " Trahit sua quemque voluptas " was said by one who did not realise perhaps the distinction that should be drawn from the practical point of view between the pleasure which is not always proposed as an end, and the desire which is always a motive, even when it is not the desire of enjoyment, even when its satisfaction involves suffer- ing. The real meaning of the aphorism is this — each of us is led by his own inclinations. We must there- fore recognise the inclinations characteristic of each of those whose conduct we desire to direct, in order to ascertain what are the inclinations whose develop- ment may be useful to the development of morality, and to endeavour to give to the moral prescription 366 SANCTION AND MORAL EDUCATION. the support which would be absent if those inclina- tions were, so to speak, only "skin deep." Far from skimming over the surface of the consciousness, moral law should penetrate it ; and there is no other means of penetrating a mind than the natural path traced out by the tendencies, the inclinations, and the appetites. Punishment and reward are means of superficial action which can only disturb the con- sciousness by the impetus of the shock. It is not by them that prohibitions or prescriptions are insinuated into the mind. On the contrary, habit dulls the sensibility to those sanctions because they are mainly external. M. Enrico Ferri^ rightly says that "the experi- ence of daily life in the family, in the school, and in the social group, as well as the history of social life, show that to render less pernicious the outburst of the passions, it is far better to take them in flank and at their origin than to attack them in front. To preserve his wife's fidelity the astute husband counts on many other considerations than the regulations of the penal code against adultery. . . . Inattention and tendencies to destruction in the child are much better restrained by well-adapted games than by a punishment which has failed to repress them. . . . That is why experience shows in the judicial-criminal domain that punishments fail completely in the end, which is entirely one of social defence, so that we must have recourse to other means of satisfying the requirements of social order. Hence what I have called * penal substitutes' (sostitutivi penali).'' The conception of "substitutes" for punishment is summed up as follows: The legislature, after ^ Socwlogia criminaley pp. 395 et seq. MORAL SUGGESTION. 367 having examined the varied aspects and manifesta- tions of the individual and social activity, after having discovered the origin, the conditions, and the consequences of criminal facts, after learning the psychological and sociological laws which, in a great part at any rate, give the reason of tjiem, ought to endeavour to exercise a felicitous influence on the processus of criminality. For that purpose the social organism should receive such an orientation that human activity instead of being uselessly threatened with repression may be guided in a continuous and indirect manner towards non-criminal objects, by offering the freest possible course to individual energies and ends, but avoiding as much as possible temptations and opportunities for crime. 174. Moral Suggestion. With respect to most people we must act as with respect to delinquents; and to prevent the former from engaging in vice we must use the processes that are employed to prevent the latter from falling back into crime. As we give up the idea of inspiring them with the fear of punishment, we must accept the obligation of giving them a moral education. Now we must be sure that the moralising action is exercised not by speech, command, or prohibition, but by suggestion which varies with the individual, and differs in its nature according to the character appropriate to each case and corresponding to particular tendencies. If a child or a man has more marked aesthetic than scientific tendencies, do not idly preach to him the love of science which would lead another man by the cult of the true to very 368 SANCTION AND MORAL EDUCATION. lofty social and moral sentiments. Let us show him the neighbouring road which passes from the beautiful to the good; let us excite his aesthetic sentiments until he desires to see beauty in conduct, and harmony both in his acts and in the totality formed by his acts and those of his fellows. Let each character retain its peculiar aspect, and for that purpose preserve its characteristic tendencies. It will none the less be normal and moral; for Virtue may be attained by many ways as long as these tendencies do not exclude certain sentiments which are indispensable to morality. Hence, to penetrate into the heart of a man, let us study his character and adapt our method of acting to his requirements. Let us understand him well in order that in his turn he may enjoy with us a unity of ideas and sentiments. If we wish to educate a weak-minded person, the best thing is first to leave him in the company of good comrades, who, without trying to attract him by benefits or kindnesses, little by little determine in him sympathies and antipathies. He attaches himself to the most sympathetic, follows him, imitates him, is devoted to him, and obeys him just as a hypnotised person is dominated by his magnetiser. Thus is exercised moral suggestion; and it is the more powerful in proportion as the sympathy inspired in the patient by his companion is great. Imitation springs from sympathy, or rather blends with it; for sympathy results from spontaneous imitation, which is rendered easy by the affinities of two characters. The two phenomena react on and mutually strengthen each other. By spontaneous imitation one is subjected to the thraldom of custom, MORAL SUGGESTION. 369 of fashion, and manners. Through it we acquire methods of thinking, feeling, and acting, which are strange or foreign in their origin, and which are assimilated the more easily according as they meet with fewer antagonisms in the mind that receives them. - Now the power of antagonistic sentiments may be reduced beforehand by slow pressure exer- cised by the skilful teacher, so that the path is made clear for new tendencies. Young people whose sentiments are not yet fixed and are not yet completely developed are particularly apt to receive moral suggestions both negative and positive, exercised in the direction of restraint or in that of the exaltation of certain sentiments. That is why people anxious about their moral future have always confided the education of youth to those who have the same ideal as the great majority of the citizens in the midst of whom they fill the important part of suggesters. The wisest of the Greeks and Romans kept their children as far as possible from educators like the Sophists and the Academicians, skilful as they were to capture the intellect, but far too hostile to the virtues which Greece and Rome had learned to esteem. Modern races should show the same care to preserve their young people from morbid suggestions, which are fatal to social harmony and to the realisation of a collective ideal. In fact, the happy choice of the educators of youth is a condition of moral safety to the country; the future depends upon it; and not only the future of those who have been subject to moral or immoral suggestion, not only the future of their whole genera- tion, but also the future of successive generations, which will grow up in a social environment in which 24 370 SANCTION AND MORAL EDUCATION. certain sentiments indispensable to morality will be developed, or will be stifled as soon as they appear. For the whole of the people act on each individual as a skilful teacher. In this totality each being finds a more or less considerable number of citizens with whom he is in sympathy, whom he follows, imitates, and copies, and whose manners and maxims he fully adopts. This group of models must not form a sect which is opposed to the neighbouring sect of different manners. If education is one, if some fundamental principles remain common in spite of the inevitable divergences which are due to diversity of tempera- ment, the moral unity is assured. Moral anarchy, on the contrary, arises from antagonistic morbid sugges- tions, from radically opposed methods of education. It is only therefore when a people makes an effort to give to its youth as far as possible the same education of the sentiments, and the same " moral suggestion," that it may expect to see a diminution in the number and the importance of crimes and faults committed in its midst by individuals or communities. The real sanction of the laws is in the morals which make their observation easy and sure. To give to the moral law and to moral precepts their full authority, they must penetrate manners. It is for moralists, for all those who believe they are in posses- sion of the best rules of conduct, to force themselves, not by crying in the wilderness, but by acting on their environment, to secure the appearance in their country, and in humanity generally, of well co- ordinated collective tendencies, of social causes of morality, capable of opposing the social causes of madness and misconduct. BIBLIOGRAPHY. Aristotle. — Nicomachaean Ethics. (Edit. Acad, of Berlin. Reimer, 183 1.) Aristotle.— Politics. Baldwin (J. M.).— Social and Ethical Interpretations in Mental Development. Ballion (Dr.). — La mort chez les animaux. Bazas, Constant, 1900. Bancel. — Le coop^ratisme. Schleicher, Paris, 1901. Belot. — La Religion comme principe sociologique, "Revue philosophique," March 1900. Bernard (C. L). — Legons sur les phenom^nes de la vie. Bergsen. — Les Donn^es immediates de la conscience. Paris, Alcan, 1899. BONCOUR (P.). — Le f^ddralisme ^conomique. Paris, Alcan, 1900. BOUGLE.— Les Id^es dgalitaires. Paris, Alcan, 1899. BOUTROUX. — " Morale sociale." Legons faites au College des sciences sociales. Paris, Alcan, 1899. Brochard. — La Morale ancienne et la morale moderne, "Revue Philosophique," January 1900. Brooks Adams. — La loi de la civilisation et de la decadence. Paris, Alcan, 1899. Brunschwicg. — L'ordre des joies, in " Morale sociale." Paris, Alcan, 1899. Brunschwicg.— Introduction k la vie de Tesprit. Paris, Alcan, 1900. Chabot.— Nature et morality. Paris, Alcan, 1897. COMTE (Aug.). — Cours de philosophie positive. COMTE (Aug.).— La Sociologie resum^e par Rigolage. Paris, Alcan, 1897. 372 BIBLIOGRAPHY. COSTE. — UExp^rience des peuples et les provisions qu'elle autorise. Paris, Alcan, 1900. CULLERRE (Dr.).— Les fronti^res de la folic. Paris, 1888. Dargun. — Ursprung und Entwickelungsgeschichte der Eigen- thums, 1884. "Zeitsch. f. vergl. Rechtsw," Bd. v. Darlu. — La classification des idees morales du temps present, in "Morale sociale." Paris, Alcan, 1899. Darlu. — La morale chrdtienne et la conscience contemporaine, ** Revue de metaph. et de morale," 1900, p. 257. Delbet. — La morale positive. {Ibid,) Delbos. — Le kantisme et la science de la morale, " Revue de mOtaph. et de mor.," March 1900. DUGAS. — L'amitie antique. Paris, Alcan, 1896. Dugas. —Analyse psychologique de I'idee de devoir, "Revue philosophique," 1897, t. xliv. DUMONT (Arsbne). — La Morale basOe sur la dOmographie. Paris, Schleicher, 1901. DURKHEIM. — La division du travail social. Paris, Alcan, 1893. DURKHEIM.— L'AnnOe sociologique, 1899-1900. ESPINAS. — Les SociOtes animates. Paris, Alcan, 1878. Ferri (E.). — Sociologia criminale. . Turin, Bocca, 4th ed., 1900 (also an abridged English edition). FouiLLl&E. — Critique des syst^mes de morale contemporains. Paris, Alcan, 3rd ed., 1893. FouiLLEE. — La France au point de vue moral. Paris, Alcan, 1900. Fragapane.— Objetto e limiti della filosofia del diritto. Rome, Loescher, 1900. Fragapane. — II problema delle origine del diritto. Rome, Loescher, 1896. Fregier. — Des classes dangereuses de la population dans les grandes villes et des moyens de les rendre meilleures. Paris, 1840. GOBLOT.— Essai sur la classification des sciences. Paris, Alcan, 1898. Grasset (Dr.). — La superiority intellectuelle et la nevrose. Montpellier, Coulet, 1900. GUYAU. — Esquisse d'une morale sans obligation ni sanction. L'irrOligion de I'avenir. Paris, Alcan, 1896. BIBLIOGRAPHY. 373 James (W.). — Principles of Psychology. Cf. Marillier, La psychologic de W. James, "Revue philosophique," 1892, ii. p. 449. Janet (Pierre). — L'Automatisme psychologique. Alcan, 1889. Janet (Pierre). — N^vroses et iddes fixes. Alcan, 1898. Janet (Paul).— La Morale. Paris, Delagrave, 5th ed., 1898. Kant. — Critique of Practical Reason. KOVALEVSKY.— La Morale de Tolstoi, in "Morale Sociale." Paris, Alcan, 1899. Lalande. — La dissolution oppos^e k revolution. Paris, Alcan, 1899. Laveleye (de). — De la propriete et de ses formes primitives. 2nd ed., Alcan, 1897. Legrain (Dr.).— Du ddlire chez les degendres. Paris, 1886. Legrain (Dr.). — L'anthropologie criminelle au Congrfes de Bruxelles en 1892 (extrait de la "Revue scientifique ")• Letourneau. — The Evolution of Property. Contemporary Science Series. Lichtenberger. — La Philosophic de Nietzsche. Paris, Alcan, 1900 (4th ed.). Lombroso. — L'Uomo Delinquente. French and German trans. Turin, Bocca, 4th ed., 1887. Lombroso and Ferrero.— La Donna Delinquente. Abridged English translation, " The Female Oflfender." Lourbet. — Le probl^me des sexes. Giard et Bri^re, Paris, 1900. Magnan (Dr.). — Lemons cliniques sur les maladies mentales. Alcan, 1897. Malapert.— In "Morale sociale." Alcan, 1899. Marion. — Lemons de morale. Paris, A. Colia MARx2(Karl).— Salaires, prix et profits. Giard et Bri^re, 1899. Marx (Karl).— Das Capital. English translation. Mazarella. — La Condizione giuridica del marito nella famiglia primitiva (matriarchale). Catana, Coco, 1899. Mill (John Stuart). — Utilitarianism, i ith ed., 1891, Longmans. ".Merriam. — History of the Theory of Sovereignty since Rousseau. Columbia, Univ. Press, 1900. -NiEBOER (Dr.).— Slavery, an industrial system. The Hague, 1899. Nietzsche. — Menschliches Allzumenschliches. Nietzsche.— Also sprach Zarathustra. English translation. 374 BIBLIOGRAPHY. Patten (Simon NJ. — The Economic Foundations of Pro- tection. Paulhan. — UActivitd mentale et les Elements de I'esprit. Paulhan. — Les Caract^res, Les Types intellectuels, Esprits logiques et esprits faux. Paris, Alcan, 1896. Payot.— L'Education de la volontd. Paris, Alcan, 1901, 12th edition. PiLLON. — Ann^e philosophique, 1868. Proal. — Le crime et la peine. Paris, Alcan, 1891. Renard. — Le regime socialiste. Paris, Alcan, 1898. Renouvier. — La science de la morale. Paris, Ladrange, 1869. Ribot. — Psychology of the Emotions (Contemporary Science Series), Maladies de la volont^, Psychologie de Tattention, L'imagination crdatrice. Paris, Alcan. Richard. — Revue critique, "Revue Philosophique," 1896, t xlii. p. 529. Richard. — "Revue Philosophique," 1899, t. xliii. p. 476. Romanes.— Mental Evolution in Man. Sabatier. — Esquisse d'une philosophie de la religion. Fisch- bacher, Paris, 6th ed., 1901. See (H.).--Les Classes rurales en France au moyen ige. Paris, Giard et Bri^re, 1901. SOLLIER (Dr.).—Psychologie de I'idiot et de I'imb^cile. Paris, Alcan, 1 891. Spencer. — Principles of Sociology. London, 1870. Spencer.— The Data of Ethics. Summary of Spencer's Philo- sophy, by Howard Collins. Spinoza.— Ethica. Edit. Van Vloten (English trans.). Stein. — La Question sociale au point de vue philosophique. Paris, Alcan, 1900. Stirner. — Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum. (French trans. " Revue blanche," 1900.) Tanon. — L'£ volution du droit. Alcan, 1900. Tarde. — Les lois de I'imitation. 2nd ed. "La logique sociale." Paris, Alcan, 1895. Tolstoi. — What's to be Done? — Pamphilius and Julius— Com- mentary on the Gospel, etc. White.— History of the Conflict between Science and Religion. Zenker. — Naturliche Entwickelungsgeschichte Gesellschaft. Berlin, Reimer, 1899. INDEX. Aboulia, §33, 178 Accident, criminal by, § 75 Action : —moral, § 28, pp. 53 et seq,; voluntar)% do.; first stage of, 61, 62; instinctive, 97; im- moral, V. ; social, in dealing with criminals, 350 Acts : — voluntary, 63 ; moral, place of joy in, § 70 ; immoral, V. ; why called vicious, 153 Adams {^xodks)i 210; (Maurice), 236«. -Esthetics, § 59, § 69 Agent, 61, §47,93 Agriculture (and property), 224 Alcoholism, § 86 Althusiusy 276, 281 Altruism, §61, 134, 144, 233, 235, 270 Ambtl Anakj 196, 199 Amor Dei intellectualis^ 117 et seq. Andaman Islanders, 169;/. Animal societies, 128; love in, 129 Animals, man and, 327 Anomia, and crime, 187 Antagonistic reductives, 125, 133, 140, 177 Antecedent, and cause, 90 Apaches, 199, 201 Appreciation, errors of, 337 Aptitudes, 273 Aquinas^ St, Thomas^ 275 Aristocracy, § 122 ; of Plato, 42 Aristotle, 3, 4, 30, §23, 53, 70, 114, 120, 138, 191, 205, 251, 327 Arts and ethics, §15; of human conduct, 26 et seq,\ aim of, 123 Asceticism, 120 Assaults, indecent, 165, 174, 338 Association, §30, 219 Attention, §30; multilinear, 69; voluntary, 139 ; pathology of, 175 Austin, 257;/., 259«., 26o«., 267;/., 274/1., 275«., 276;/. Authority, 205 Bachofen, 145, 196 Bain, 98« Baldwin, 326 Ballion, 204 Bancroft, 200 Beautiful, cult of, § 69 Bedouins, 201 Belief, 11 Belot, 8 Bent ham, 103 Bergsen, d'^^, 85«. Bernard (Claude), 82, 83 Birds, monogamic, 196 Blackmail, 167 Bodin, 275 Bon {/e), 158 Bona/d {de), 278 Boncour, 219, 221, 222n,, 287 Botocodos, 201 BotigU, 207, 209 Bourret (Cardinal), 9 BoutrouXt i6n. Brentano, 219 Brunschvicg, 148, I50«. Burchardt, 200 Burke, 277 Capital, § 107, 227 Cartesianism, ^\n. 376 INDEX. Caste, 205 Cause (and antecedent), 90 Centralisation, pp. 284 et seq, Chabot^ 146 Chamberlain^ 126//., 134/f., 140^., Character, origin of, §44; pos- sible modification of, 346 Charity, 266 Children, organising power, 134 ; primitive condition of, 200; work of, 308 ; duties towards, 321 ; their duties, 324 Choice, 54 ; of the best, 70 ; in- telligible, 93 Christianity, 3 ; sociological ex- planation of its spread, 9, 208 Chrysippus^ 127 Clan, and property, 224 Classes (the), 205 Cleanthes^ 18, 120, 123 Clergy, hostility to evolutionism, 7 Collective sentiments, § 108, 228 Collins, 2^2n., 233«. Comenius, 320 Communism, 225 Competition, 292 ComU^ 116, 191, 194, 232 Conception, 54, § 29, 143 Conduct, rational, § 19, 35 ; sys- tematic, 36, 153; instinctive, 54; reprehensible, 155 Conflict, necessary, § 119 Conscience, 33, § 45 ; voice of. Conscious processes, § 35 Consciousness, moral, § 17 ; of the good, 33 Constraint, 264 Contract, § 100 Co-education, 320 Co-operation, 306 Corporations, suppression of ancient, 227 Corvee, and the State, 297 Cosmology, 7 CostCy 209, 210, 216, 285 Cotilanges (Fustel de), 207 CratyluSj li$n. Crime, § 72 ; due to unsatisfied needs, 172 Criminal, §73; classes of, §74, § 84 ; insane, § 76. Criminologists, 156 et seq» Crisis, the moral, i Criticism, spirit of, i ; right of, 13 ; al>stention from, 246 CulUre, 175//. Culture, and inheritance, 273^. Customs, ancient, preserved, 156 DaHemagne, 172 Dareste, 304 Dargun, 21 5«. Darlu, 22, 241 Darwin, 15, 236 Dawson, 198 Degenerates, intelligent, § 78 Degeneration, 185 Delbos, 34«. Deliberation, 54, §34, 67, 143, 340 Descartes, 23 Desire, § 54 Despotism, § 120 Determinism, 72 ^/j^^., §43, 185 et seq. ; of immoral actions, V. , pp. 152 et seq. Devotion, 122, § 128, 262 D'Hulst, 9 Dieyeries, 197 Diogenes Laertius, 1 01, 121 Disaggregation, mental, 177 Disintegration, social, 3 Dissociation, 57 Disturbance, social, § 86 Divorce, 321 Dugas, 14, 44, 45. I37«-, 327 Dutkheim, 8, 16, 17, 18, 74, I09«., iio«., 187, 195, 204, 206, 218, 231, 287 Duty, 14, 15, 26 et seq,, 36, 44, 75, 76, 266, 282 Economic, life, 193 ; primitive state, § loi ; evolution, § 102, 294 ; facts, order of, 294 Economy, political, and morality, 296 Edgeworth, 47«. Education, duty of State, § 140; and sanction, 352 INDEX. 377 Ego, origin of, 82, 93 Egoism, § 55, 128 Egyptians, 207 Ellis (Havelock), ii6w., 156W., i62»., i68«., i7i»., i79»., i8i»., 240». Emotion, shocks, 136 Encyclopadia Britannica^ 4I«.| 275«. Endogamy, 192, 195, 197 Enthusiasm, close of era of, 10 Environment, 186 Epicureanism, 4, 5, loi Epicurus^ 84, 95, 10 1, 102, 103, 120, 150, 327 Equality, § 96 Eroticism, 116 Espinasy 128, 203 Ethics, and metaphysics, 5; and religion, §5; and science, 11, §10; and arts, § 15; indepen- dent, §7; science of, 13; Kan- tian, §9; technical character of, § 12; social, § 16; compared to mathematics, 13; pure and applied, 40 ; of mind and nature, 23 ; individual and social. III. Ethical, religion, 10; research, 40,48 Evolution, hostility of clergy to, 7 ; and Spencer, 46 ; obedience to law of duty, 47 ; of law and morals, 194; family, §89; politi- cal, § 99 ; economic, § 102 ; of social sentiments, 233 ; socio- logical, § 112; social, 254; in- dividual, 262 ; conscious, 265 Exaggeration, § 82, 177 Exercise, §71 Exhibitionist mania, 174 Exogamy, 192, 195, 197 Expansion, force of vital, pp. 126 et seq. Family, 74; dissolution, § 92; future of, § 93 Fanaticism, 228 Fault, 152 et seq. Fear, 138; a normal sentiment? 363 Fecundity, 128 FM, 14OM., 16% ft, Ferrerot 315 Ferrty 157, 158, 159, 1 60, 366 FerruSy 157 Firmness, 135, §66 FouilUe, 6, 9, io«., I30«., 23611. , 248, 249;;., 282 Fragapaney 212 France (A.), 360 Eraser y 198 Fraternity, 326 Freedom, 208 FrJgier, 157, 159 Friendship, 326 Gaillofty 177, 179 Gall, 157 Galtotiy 155 Games, 128 Garafolo, 158 Generosity, § 63, 127, 265 Gide, 244 Gobloty 186 Good, the, 70; the idea of, and the tendency to, § 38 ; and the beautiful, § 69 Government, 208, § 97, 274 Grassier y i^on, Greece, 3 Gregory VII., 275 Grosse, 197, 215 GrotiuSy 276, 281 Guiberty 9 Guyauy 25«., 31, 73»., 77«., \o\n,y 104/^., 124, 124/2., 128, 129, 13011., 146, 150, 162^., i63«., i75''-> 248 Guy of y 219 Happiness, greatest of greatest number, 104; intellectual, §^7; § 70 ; result of moral action, 355 Harris (T. L.), 241 Hedonism, § 51 Hegely 145, 278, 282 Heredity, 59, 75»§86 Hereditary property, § 133 Historical school, 282 HobbeSy 250, 276, 278, 281, 282 Hoffbauery i68«. 378 INDEX. Hollands 274/7., 276//. Houti^ 182 Hughes^ 162 Hugo^ 277 Humanity, love of, 117; religion of, §111 Hunger, 193 Huret^ 157 Hypocrisy, 330 Idea, directing, of organism, 82 Ideal, and real, §11; moral, 25 ; psychological, § 66, 45, 51 et seq,; construction of, 49 Idealism, § 13, 22, 283 Idealists, 21 Id^-force, 86, 93«., 174 et seq. Idiot, morality of, 163 Imagination, § 29 Imbecile, morality of, 163 Imitation, 73; and sympathy, 368 Immorality, cause of, 155 ; nature of, 292; struggle against, IV. P-334 Imperatives, of Kant, 26 et seq. Impressions, communicability of, 124 Impulsive, criminal, 157, 347 ; man, 348 Imputability, 348 Individual, dignity of (v. Kant), §21; the moral, 127, 1"^$ et seq. Individualism, 227, § 113, 284 Industrialism, § 107 Inheritance, and culture, 273^. Instinct, gregarious, 74 Intentions, moral, 324 Interest, § 54; and desire, 105; collective, § 56 Invention, 24, 25, 39, 283 Instability, pathological, 176 ; mental, 177; and aboulia, § 33 Instruction, obligatory, p. 290 Irreflection, § 36 Irresponsibility, 343 James, W., 57, 58, 67, I50«., I75«., 176 Janet (Paul), 37, 137, i75«., 354; (Pierre) I77«. J(^* 221 Jesiis, 255 Jones, 198 Joy, § 70 Judge, the State as, 291 Jus, \at9e et necis, 201 ; maritale, 203 ; utendi, 216 ; abutendi, 216 Justice, 42, 204, 250, § 128, § 129 Kant, his philosophy, 14; his Ethics, §9; Critique of Pure Reason, 15; his imperatives, 26 et seq.; and the future of hu- manity, 29 ; and the dignity of the human person, 31, 34, 36, 39, §126; on the formal con- ditions of morality, 34 ; on ab- solute moral value, 37 ; his method, §22, 40; and pure reason, 52 ; on the unique motive of moral conduct, 64, 81 ; and Free Will, § 43 ; his theory applies to superhuman beings, 65; his psychology, 78; his hypothesis, 82; his aesthetics, 123, 124, 143, 145; and pro- perty, § 130; and personal value, 274 ; on social contract, 277 ; and popular will, 280 ; on dele- gation of the powers of the State, 281 ; and responsibility, 335 ; and sanction, 354 Kovalewsky, 225, 242;;. Krause, 200 Kropoikin (Prince), 203«., 204;/., 264;x. Labour, division of, § 103 ; § 107 ; defined, 309 Laccassagne, 158, 349 Lalande, 196, 202, 207 Land, 224 Langy 22%n. Lceveieye, 224 Law, 204, § 99 Lecky, 98». Legislation, § 134 Legrain, 163, 182 Leibnitz, 41, 133, 145 Lemiinier, 279 Letourneau, I92«., 196^.,. 228/1., 303 Leviathan (Hobbes), 248, 282 INDEX. 379 Levirate, 195, 198 ^/ seq. Liberty, the ratio essendi of duty, I5» 33; noumenal, 33; and morality, II. pp. 80 et seq.^ § 45, § 46 ; individual, 235 ; meta- physical, § 126 Lichtenberger^ 236, 239^. Life, law of, 46 ; political, § 95 Locke, 277, 281 Lombroso, i^on.y 156, 158, 160, i62«., i68«., I79«., i8i«., 182, 184, 315 Lourbet^ 315 Louvii^ 244 Love, 116, 129, 193, 242, 243 Lynching, 352 Machinery, 218, 227 Mackenzie (J. S.), 4I«., 43«., 64«., 98;/., 112// , 207;/., 209W., 2I9»., 222;/ , 2277/ , 233«., 263;;., 273«. Mackenzie ^ 198 MacLenttan^ 195 Magnan, 164, 182 Maine (Sir H.), 196, 207;/., 21 iw., 21 3«., 222«., 267;/. Malapert^ 29 et seq, Malebranche, 37, 342 Man, a psychological being, 10; a social being, 10; makes his own morality, 1 1 ; the divine in, 114; the wise, 121 et seq. ; and animals, 327 Mania, "reasoning," 162; ** ex- hibitionist," 174 Manneis, good, § 36 Manouvrier^ 182 Marion ^ 35 Marriage, 186, 214, 317 Marro^ 196 Marshall y 217/J., 227«. Marx (Karl), 6, 226«., 227«., 304 Matriarchate, 195, § 90 Mazzarella, I95«., 196, 200 Maudsley^ 157, 158, i62«., i63«., i69«., I79«. Mean, the golden, 43, 138 Meek, the, § 121 Megalomania, 165 Meno, 70«. Mercier, lOOn., 126/;., 1 40;/. Merit, 358 Merriam, 278 Metaphysics, 5, 50 Method, § 26 Middendof/ {von), 200n, Middle Ages, the, and friendship, 327 Might, 250 Mill (John Stuart), 36, 46, 47, ioo«., io7«., 112 Mobiles et Motifs, distinguished, 87«. Moderation, § 67 Modesty, 332 Mohammed, 10, 255 Monadistic and Monistic views of justice, 263//. Money, 210, 243 Moral, crisis, § I ; Philosophy, 5 ; Ideal, 7; and physical laws, 19; theory, 25 ; activity, 25, 40 ; hygiene, 28 ; consciousness, §17 ; sense, 32 ; Will, I. ; worth and duty, §20; subjectivism, §39; inertia, 103 ; apotheosis of, 105 ; precepts, 105; individual, 134; firmness, 135; virtues, 142; in- sanity, 162; imbecility, 162; vertigo, 179; suggestion, 367 Moralists, Scotch and French, 32 Morality, ancient, §2; as taught by philosophers, 5 ; conditions of, § 6 ; scientific, 16 ; its do- main, 19 ; technical character, §12; and evolution, 20; and the ** imperative," 26 et seq.; applied, 40; sociological, "of dry bread," lOi ; mystical, 116; Greek, 144 ; in economics, 292 ; "of slaves,*' 363 Morgan (Lloyd), 125//. Morselli, 157, 169^., 187;/. Munroe, 320 Mysticism, § 58 Napoleon, 254 Naturalism, § 13, § 50, 283 Nature of man, 121 Neo-platonists, 115 Nieboer, 198, 222 38o INDEX. Nietzsche^ 236 et seq. Non-resistance, 241, § 118 Noumenon, 33, 81 Obligation, moral, 44, 75, 204- Obsession, §81, 174 Oceania, 199 Ontogeny of societies, 191 Ojibeway Indians, 198 Optimism, Stoic, 122 Organisation, social, § 65 ; eco- nomic, 292 Orthodoxy, 289 Over-man, the, § 114 Overwork, 186 Ovidi 6gn, Pain-Pleasure, ii3«., 125 Passions, 118 Pastoral tribes, 215 Patten^ 293 Paulhan^ 57 Perception, §29, §31 Perfection, animal, 96; intel- lectual, 114 Person, the real agent, § 47 Fhaedo, 23^, 42;?. PhaedruSf 1151*. Philosophy, ** poverty of," 6 ; powerlessness of, 6; of science, 6; rights of, 12; phenomenist, 90 Physiology, mental, 45, 55 Pig, doctrine of, satisfied, 108 Piilofty 31, 50 Pity, 122, 239 Plato, 3, 4, 22, 23, 30, 42, 120, 205, 249, 298 Play, 128 Pleasure, psychological, 136; in- tellectual, 245, § 70 Pleasure- Pain, II3«., 125 Plotinus, 115 Plutocracy, § 98 Polyandry, 195 Polygamy, 195 Population, 206, 208 Positivism, 116 Potestas, patria, § 92 Powerlessness, of religion, 8; of philosophy, 6 Prevision, sociological, 20, 25 ; scientific, 20 Prichard, 162 Priestly y 104 Proaly 209«., 2II«. Promiscuity, 192, 195 Property, 202, § los, § 106, § 130, §131, §132 Prostitution, 315 ProudhoHj 279, 280 Psychic, nature of processes, 64 Psychology, scientific, 12 ; its teaching, 53 Puchta, 200 Punishment, immorality of, 360; utilitarian rdle of, 361 Pyromania, 169/1. Pyrrhonism, 4 Quetelety 157 Ratzel^ 197 Raymondy 176 Real, and Ideal, § 11 Reason, §41; data of, §18; de- fined by Marion, 35 ; pure practical, § 27 ; human and animal, 96 Recidivism, 159 Reform, § 132 Religion, 3 ; powerlessness of, 8 ; of Humanity and the Unknow- able, §111; of suffering, 240 Religious institutions, 192; senti- ments, 332 Kenardy 298 Renouvier^ 13, 14, 16, 1 7, 31, 4I, 65, 86, 88, I07«, I2i«, 180, 270, 314, 318, 321 Renunciation, 242 Republic (of Plato), 42«., 359 Respect of children to parents, 326 Responsibility, social, 334 Revolt, right to, 284 Riboty 55«., 69, ioo«., 116, I24«., I2S«., I27«., I40«., i5o«., 162;/., i68«., i69«., 175;/. Richard, 315, 363 Right, 204, 250, §123, §124, § 125, § 126, § 127, § 130 ** Rights of Man," 268 INDEX. 381 Risk, §71 Ritchie^ 23911 . RoberUoHy 275«., 277;?. Rochefoucauld {^t La), 126 Roger St Thorold^ 226 n, Romanes, 56, 97 Romanticism, 40 Rousseau, 33, 277, 278, 280, 281 Ruskin, 123;/. Sabatier, 289 Samoyedes, 201 Sanction, 352 Savage, 162 Sayigny, 277 Science, of Ethics, 16 ; a product of social life, 38 ; conscience, liberty and, §45; instruction should be given to all, 290 Schelling, 278 Schiller, 193W. Schmidt, 249 Schutz, 197 Sie, 226//. Self-perception, § 32 Semitic tribes, 207 Sensorial type, §3L Sentiments, collective, § 108; primitive, § 109; genuine human, Sergi, 157, 158 Sexes, co-education and equality of, 320 Sexual love, 126, 129; instinct morbid, 165, 181 ; disorders, l6gn.; relations, 192, 196 Sidgwick, 64«., II5«., 138;/. Sioux, 199 Sismondi, 280 Slavery, 193, 197, 199 et seq., % 105, 251, 276 Smith, Adam, § 24 Sociability, 39, 76, 126, §64, 141 Social contract, § 137 ; disintegra- tion, 3 5 conscience, 39 ; statics and dynamics, 191 ; responsi- bility, 334 ; action, 350 Societies, animal, 128, 203, §94; organisation, § 65, 133 Sociology, its r6le, 17; interpreta- tion of its data, 21; present state of, § 87 ; anticipations, §112 Socrates, 70, 108, 154, 156, 254, 337 Sohm, 200 Solidarity, 122; immoral effects of» §85 ; professional, 221, 235, 273; Durkheim's "mechanical." 74, 204, 231; "organic," 218, 231 ; in economic order, 301 Sollier, 163 Sorley, 98^., 124/^., 207/;. Soul, phenomena of, 23 ; of divine origin, 42 Sovereignty, § 135. § ' 37 Spencer, Herbert, 8, § 25, 53, 125, 128, 146, 193;/., 195, 224, 225, 230 et sea., 267«., 284 Spinoza, 38, 41, 52, 53, 89, 112, § 59, 239, 250, 251 Spiritualism, § 13 ; dualistic, 7, 23 Stability, morbid, 176 State, 202 et seq., V. Stein, 285 Steinthetz, 200 Stimer, 249 Stoicism, 3, 4, 18, § 60, 138, 208, 327, 385 Stout, 55«., 113;/. Struelens, 182 Subjectivity, its r61e, 26 Suggestion, pathological, 1 1 ; moral, 367 Suicide, 187 Sympathy, and duty, 44 ; mark of aptitude, 73, 74, 124, §61, 231 ; imitation, 368 Taboo, 228 Tacitus, 224 Tamn, 212 Tarde, 73, 146, 284, 288 Taxation, 300 Temperance, 139 Tendencies, instinctive, 53 et seq, ; fugitive, 62 ; causes of volition, 80; conflict of, 71; to good, §38; and heredity, §40; indi- vidual and collective, 76; differ- ent moral, §49; to pleasure, 99 et seq., 192 ; modified, 106 ; 382 INDEX. to happiness, 113; attracted by mystery, 116; social, 124 ei seq.y §65; constituting char- acter, I2,(>eiseq.\ to co-ordinate, 152 ei seq. ; to crime, V. , passim ; of strong to oppress the weak, 223; development of scientific and artistic, 229 et seq. ; aristo- cratic and democratic, 252 limausy 23, 42;;. Tolstoi y 236 et seq. , § 1 16 Totem, 228 TourftiaCf 165//. Tradition, power of, 74 Truth, § 140 Tyranny, socialistic, 220 Uebermensch, § 114 Unbalanced, criminals, § 79 Unions, trades, 218, § 104, § 139 Unity, religious Unfit, sacrifice of, § 1 15 Uniformity, of tendencies and heredity, § 40 Unknowable, the, § III Utilitarianism, 49, 103, 106 et seq. Vengeance, 212 Verga^ 162 Vertu (Jules), 179 Vertigo, moral, § 83 Vice, 153 Vidocq^ 157 Violence, 245 Virtue, private, 37 ; and sentiment, 44 ; and truth, § 68 Voisiy 164 Wages system, 304 Walker, 217/;. WamotSy 183 Wealth, and morality, 295 Westermarck^ I93«. White, Sn. Wife, choice of, 186 Will, good, 79 Woman, §90; work of, 308; rights of, 314 Work, of women and children, 308 Workman, the, his value, 309 Yvernh, 158 Zarathrustra, 237 et seq, Zenker, 211, 225, 249;/. ZenOy 123 THE WALTER SCOTT PUBLISHING CO., LTD., NEWCASTLE-ON-TYNE. NEW BOOKS IMPORTED BY CHARLES SCRIBNEKS SONS, NEW YORK CITY. GREAT WRITERS. A NEW SERIES OF CRITICAL BIOGRAPHIES OF FAMOUS WRITERS OF EUROPE AND AMERICA. LIBRARY EDITION. Printed on large paper of extra quality^ in handsome bindings Demy Svo, price $i,qo each. ALPHABETICAL LIST. PRESS NOTICES, Life of Jane Austen. By Qoldwin Smith. ** Mr. Gold win Smith has added another to the not inconsiderable roll of eminent men who have found their delight in Jane Austen. Certainly a fascinating book." — Spectator, Life of Balzac. By Frederick Wedmore. **A finished study, a concentrated summary, a succinct analysis of Balzac's successes and failures, and the causes of these successes and failures, and of the scope of his genius." — Scottish Leader, Life of Charlotte Bronte. By A. Birrell. *' Those who know much of Charlotte Bronte will learn more, and those who know nothing about her will find all that is best worth learning in Mr. Birrell's pleasant book." — St, James's Gazette, Life of Brownins:. By William Sharp. ** This little volume is a model of excellent English, and in every respect it seems to us what a biography should be." — Public Opinion, New York: Charles Scribner's Sqns. Life off Banyan. By Canon Venables. ** A most intelligent, appreciative, and valuable memoir." — Scotsman, Liffe off Bums. By Proffessor Blackie. ''The editor certainly made a hit when he persuaded Blackie to write about Bums."— iW/ Mall Gazette, Liffe off Byron. By Hon. Roden Noel. " He [Mr. Noel] has at any rate given to the world the most credible and comprehensible portrait of the poet ever drawn with pen and ink." — Manchester Examiner, Liffe off Tiiomas Carlyle. By R. Qarnett, LL.D. ** This is an admirable book. Nothing could be more felicitous and fairer than the way in which he takes us through Carlyle's life and works." —Pall Mall Gazette, Life of Cervantes. By H. E. Watts. " Let us rather say that no volume of this series, nor, so far as we can recollect, of any of the other numerous similar series, presents the facts of the subject in a more workmanlike style, or with more exhaustive know- ledge." — Manchester Guardian, Life of Colerids:e. By Hall Caine. <* Brief and vigorous, written throughout with spirit and great literary skill. " — Scotsman, Life of Cons:reve. By Edmund Qosse. ** Mr. Gosse has written an admirable and most interesting biographv of a man of letters who is of particular interest to other men of letters." — The Academy, Life of Crabbe. By T. E. Kebbel. ** No English poet since Shakespeare has observed certain aspects of nature and of human life more closely; and in the qualities of manliness and of sincerity he is surpassed by none. . . . Mr. KebbePs monograph is worthy of the subject.*' — Athenaum, Life off Darwin. By Q. T. Bettany. ** Mr. G. T. Bettany's Life of Darwin is a sound and conscientious work." — Saturday Review, Life off Dickens. By Prank T. Marzials. ** Notwithstanding the mass of matter that has been printed relating to Dickens and his works, ... we should, until we came across this volume, have been at a loss to recommend any popular life of England's most popular novelist as being really satisfactory. The difficulty is removed by Mr. Marzials' little book." — Athenceum, Life of Oeors:e Eliot. By Oscar Brownlns:. ** We are thankful for this interesting addition to our knowledge of the great novelist. "—Zj/^rarK World, New York : Charles ^cribner's Sons. Life of Emerson. By Richard Qarnett, LL.D. "As to the larger section of the public, to whom the series of Great Writers is addressed, no record of Emerson's life and work could be more desirable, both in breadth of treatment and lucidity of style, than Dr. Gamett*s." — Saturday Review, Life of Ooetiie. By James SIme. ** Mr. James Sime's competence as a biographer of Goethe, both in respect of knowledge of his special subject, and of German literature generally, is beyond question." — Manchester Guardian, Life of Goldsmith. By Austin Dobson. ** The story of his literary and social life in London, with all its humorous and pathetic vicissitudes, is here retold as none could tell it better."— Z>a/-^ Nenvs, Life of Nathaniel Hawthorne. By Moncure Conway. *' Easy and conversational as the tone is throughout, no important fact is omitted, no useless fact is recalled." — Speaker, Life of Heine. By William 5harp. "This is an admirable monograph, . . . more fully written up to the level of recent knowledge and criticism of its theme than any other English work. " — Scotstiian, Life of Victor Hugo. By Frank T. Marzlals. * * Mr. Marzials* volume presents to us, in a more handy form than any English, or even French, handbook gives, the summary of what, up to the moment in which we write, is known or conjectured about the life of the great poet." — Saturday Review, Life of Hunt By Cosmo Monkhouse. ** Mr. Monkhouse has brought- together and skilfully set in order much widely scattered material." — Athena;um, Life of Samuel Johnson. By Colonel F. Grant. *^ Colonel Grant has performed his task with diligence, sound judgment, good taste, and accuracy." — Illustrated London News , Life of Keats. By W. M. Rossettl. *' Valuable for the ample information which it contains." — Cambridge Independent, Life of Lesslng. By T. W. RoUeston. ** A picture of Lessing which is vivid and truthful, and has enough of detail for all ordinary purposes." — Nation (New York), New York : Charlbs Scribner's Sons. Life of Lons:fellow. By Prof. Eric S. Robertson. ** A most readable little book.*' — Liverpool Mercury, Life of Marryat. By David Hannay. " What Mr. Haonay had to do — give a craftsman-like account of & great craftsman who has been almost incomprehensibly undervalued — could hardly have been done better than in this little volume." — Man- chester Guardian, Life of Mill. By W. L. Courtney. ** A most sympathetic and discriminating memoir." — Glasgow Herald. Life of Milton. By Ricliard Qamett, LL.D. ** Within equal compass the life-story of the great poet of Puritanism has never been more charmingly or adequately told." — Scottish Leader, Life of Renan. By Francis Espinasse. *' Sufficiently full in details to give us a living picture of the great scholar, . . . and never tiresome or dull." — Westminster Review, Life of Dante Gabriel Rossetti. By J. Knight. ** Mr. Knight's picture of the great poet and painter is the fullest and best yet presented to the public.'" — The Graphic, Life of Schiller. By Henry W. Nevlnson. ** This is a well- written little volume, which presents the leading facts of the poet's life in a neatly rounded picture." — Scotsman, ** Mr. Nevinson has added much to the charm of his book by his spirited translations, which give excellently both the ring and sense of the original." — Manchester Guardian, Life of Arthur Schopenhauer. By William Wallace. **The series of Great Writers has hardly had a contribution of more marked and peculiar excellence than the book which the Whyte Professor of Moral Philosophy at Oxford has written for it on the attractive and still (in England) little-known subject of Schopenhauer." — Manchester Guardian. Life of Scott. By Professor Yonge. " For readers and lovers of the poems and novels of Sir Walter Scott this is a most enjoyable book. " — Aberdeen Free Press. Life of Shelley. By William Sharp. ** The criticisms . . . fentitle this capital monograph to be ranked with the best biographies of Shelley." — Westminster Review, NewYork: CHARLES Scribner's Sons. Life of Sheridan. By Lloyd Sanders. ** To say that Mr. Lloyd Sanders, in this volume, has produced the best existing memoir of Sheridan is really to award much fainter praise than the book deserves." — Manchester Guardian, ** Rapid and workmanlike in style, the author has evidently a good practical knowledge of the stage of Sheridan's day." — Saturday Review, Life of Adam Smitli. By R. B. Haldane, M.P. ** Written with a perspicuity seldom exemplified when dealing with economic science." — Scotsman, '* Mr. Haldane's handling of his subject impresses us as that of a man who well understands his theme, and who knows how to elucidate it." — Scottish Leader, ** A beginner in political economy might easily do worse than take Mr. Haldane's book as his first text-book." — Graphic, Life of Smollett. By David Hannay. ** A capital record of a writer who still remains one of the great masters of the English novel." — Saturday Review, " Mr. Hannay is excellently equipped for writing the life of Smollett. As a specialist on the history of the eighteenth century navy, he is at a great advantage in handling works so full of the sea and sailors as Smollett's three principal novels. Moreover, he has a complete acquaint- ance with the Spanish romancers, from whom Smollet drew so much of his inspiration. His criticism is generally acute and discriminating ; and his narrative is well arranged, compact, and accurate. "—5'/. James's Gazette, Life of Thackeray. By Herman Merivale and Frank T. Marzials. ** The book, with its excellent bibliography, is one which neither the student nor the general reader can well afford to miss." — Pall Mall Gazette. '' The last book published by Messrs. Merivale and Marzials is full of very real and true things." — Mrs. Anne Thackeray Ritchie on " Thackeray and his Biographers," in Illustrated London News, Life of Thoreau. By H. S. Salt. "Mr. Salt's volume ought to do much towards widening the know- ledge and appreciation in England of one of the most original men ever proints of contention at present agitating the minds of Bridge players. In par- ticular, he advances a novel theory as to "Declarations and "Doubling,** which is not unlikely to revolutionise existing methods, and to result in placing these two difficulties of the game on a thoroughly sound and solid basis. Contents: — Common-sense in Bridge Declarations — Science of Bridge Declarations — Doubling and Re-doubling — Some Points of the Game — Bridge V. Whist — Chaos of Bridge — Great Imperfection of Bridge. New York : Charles Scribner*s Sons. THE Music Story Series. A SERIES OF LITERARY- MUSICAL MONOGRAPHS. Edited by FREDERICK J. CROWEST. Illustrated with Photogravure and Collotype Portraits, Half-tone and Line Pictures, Facsimiles, etc. Square Crown Svo, Cloth^ $1.25 net FIRST VOLUME. The Story of Oratorio. By Annie W. Patierson, B.A., Mus. Doc. "Written in a bright style, in which technicalities are as much as possible avoided, Miss Patterson's monograph should find favour with the musical public " Scotsman. ALSO READY. The 5tory of Notation. By C. F. Abdy Williams, M.A, Mus. Bac. IN PREPARATION. The Story of the Pianoforte. By Algernon S. Rose, Author of "Talks with Bandsmen." The Story of Harmony. By Eustace J. Breakspeare, Author of *' Mozart,*' " Musical ^Esthetics," etc The Story of the Or^an. By C. F. Abdy Williams, Author of ♦*Bach" and "Handel" ("Master Musicians Series"). The Story of the Orchestra. By Stewart Macpherson, Fellow and Professor, Royal Academy of Music ; Conductor of the West- minster Orchestral Society. The Story of Chamber Music. By N. Kilburn, Mus. Bac (Can- tab.), Conductor of the Middlesbrough, Sunderland, and Bishop Auckland Musical Societies. The Story of Bible Music. By Eleonorb D'Esterrb-Kbsling, Author of ** The Musicians' Birthday Book." The Story of the Violin. By a Practical Violinist. The Story of Church Music. By The Editor. Etc, Etc, Etc New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. The Makers of British Art. A Series of Illustrated Monographs Edited by James A. Manson. Illustrated with Photogravure Portraits ; Half-tone and Line Reproductions of the Best Pictures. Square Crown Svo, Cloth^ $1.25 net LAND5EER, SIR EDWIN. By the EDITOR. **This little volume may rank as the most complete account of Landseer that the world is likely to possess." — Times, H. ** Mr. Manson has done his work with great thoroughness, combining the facts he has garnered into a workmanlike whole." — Magazine of Art, REYNOLDS, SIR JOSHUA. By ELSA D^ESTERRE- KEELING. "An admirable little volume . . . Miss Keeling writes very justly and sympathetically. *' — Daily Telegraph, ** Useful as a handy work of reference.'* — Athenceunu TURNER, J. W. M. By ROBERT CHIGNELL, Author of "The Life and Paintings of Vicat Cole, R.A." " This book is thoroughly competent, and at the same time it is in the best sense popular in style and treatment." — Literary World, ROMNEY, GEORGE. By Sir HERBERT MAXWELL, Bart., F.R.S., M.P. ** Sir Herbert Maxwell's brightly-written and accurate monograph will not disappoint even exacting students, whilst its charming reproductions are cer- tain to render it an attractive gift-book." — Standard, " It is a pleasure to read such a biography as this, so well considered, and written with such insight and literary skill. — Daily News. IN THE PRESS. WILKIE, SIR DAVID. By Professor BAYNE. CONSTABLE, JOHN. By the Right Honourable LORD WINDSOR. MILLAIS, SIR JOHN EVERETT. By J. EADIE REID, Author of "The Schools and Methods of Christian Art." New York : Charles Scribnbr's Sons. The Contemporary Science Series. Edited by Havelock Ellis. i2mo. Cloth. Price %i.^o per Volume, I. THE EVOLUTION OF SEX. By Prof. Patrick Geddes and J. A. Thomson. With 90 Illustrations. Second Edition. ** The authors have brought to the task— as indeed their names guarantee — ^a wealth of knowledge, a lucid and attractive method of treatment, and a rich vein of picturesque language." — NiUure. II. ELECTRICITY IN MODERN LIFE. By G. W. de TUNZELMANN. With 88 Illustrations. *' A clearly written and connected sketch of what is known about elec- tricity and magnetism, the more prominent modern applications, and the principles on which they are based." — Saturday Review, III. THE ORIGIN OF THE ARYANS. By Dr. Isaac Taylor. Illustrated. Second Edition. '* Canon Taylor is probably the most encyclopaedic all-round scholar now living. His new volume on the Origin of the Aryans is a first-rate example of the excellent account to which he can turn his exceptionally wide and varied information. . . . Masterly and exhaustive. " — Pall Mall Gazette, IV. PHYSIOGNOMY AND EXPRESSION. By P. Mante- GAZZA. Illustrated. "Brings this highly interesting subject even with the latest researches. . . . Professor Mant^azza is a writer full of life and spirit, and the natural attractiveness of his subject is not destroyed by his scientific handling of it." — Literary World (Boston). EVOLUTION AND DISEASE. By J. B. Sutton, F.R.C.S. With 135 Illustrations. '^ The book is as interesting as a novel, without sacrifice of accuracy or system, and is calculated to give an appreciation of the fundamentals of pathology to the lay reader, while forming a useful collection of illustrations of disease for medical x^itt^nz^,^*-— Journal of Mental Science, VI. THE VILLAGE COMMUNITY. By G. L. Gomme. Illustrated. " His book will probably remain for some time the best work of reference for facts bearing on those traces of the village community which have not been effaced by conquest, encroachment, and the heavy hand of Roman law." — Scottish Leader, New York : Charles Scribnbr's Sons. VII. THE CRIMINAL. By Havelock Ellis. Illustrated. Second Edition. "The sociologist, the philosopher, the philanthropist, the novelist — all, indeed, for whom the study of human nature has any attraction — will find Mr. Ellis full of interest and suggestiveness." — Academy » VIII. SANITY AND INSANITY. By Dr. Charles Mercier. Illustrated. "Taken as a whole, it is the brightest book on the physical side of mental science published in our time." — Pall Mall Gazette* IX. HYPNOTISM. By Dr. Albert Moll. Fourth Edition. "Marks a step of some importance in the study of some difficult physio- logical and psychological problems which have not yet received much attention in the scientific world of England." — Nature, X. MANUAL TRAINING. By Dr. C. M. Woodward, Director of the Manual Training School, St. Louis. Illustrated. " There is no greater authority on the subject than Professor Woodward." — Manchester Guardian, XL THE SCIENCE OF FAIRY TALES. By E. Sidney Hartland. "Mr. Hartland*s book will win the sympathy of all earnest students, both by the knowledge it displays, and by a thorough love and appreciation of his subject, which is evident throughout." — Spectator. XII. PRIMITIVE FOLK. By Elie Reclus. **An attractive and useful introduction to the study of some aspects of ethnography. ** — Nature, XIII. THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE. By Professor Letourneau. ** Among the distinguished French students of sociology, Professor Letour- neau has long stood in the first rank. He approaches the great study of man free from bias and shy of generalisations. To collect, scrutinise, and appraise facts is his chief business. In the volume before us he shows these qualities in an admirable degree." — Science, XIV. BACTERIA AND THEIR PRODUCTS. By Dr. G. Sims Woodhead. Illustrated. Second Edition. "An excellent summary of the present state of knowledge of the subject." — Lancet, XV. EDUCATION AND HEREDITY. By J. M. Guyau. ** It is at once a treatise on sociology, ethics, and pedagogics. It is doubtful whether, among all the ardent evolutionists who have had their say on the moral and the educational question, any one has carried forward the new doctrine so boldly to its extreme logical consequence." — Professor Sully in Mind, New York : Charles Scribner's Sons. XVL THE MAN OF GENIUS. By Prof. Lombroso, Elus- trated. *'By far the most comprehensive and fascinating collection of facts and generalisations concerning genias which has yet been brought together." — JimrtuU of Mental Science, XVII. THE HISTORY OF THE EUROPEAN FAUNA. By R F. SCHARFF, B.Sc, Ph.D., F.Z.S. Illustrated. XVIII. PROPERTY : ITS ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT. By Ch. Letourneau, General Secretary to the Anthro- pological Society, Paris, and Professor in the School of Anthro- pology, Paris. '*M. Letourneau has read a great deal, and he seems to us to have selected and interpreted his facts with considerable judgment and learning." — Westminster Revie%v, XIX. VOLCANOES, PAST AND PRESENT. By Prof. Edward Hull, LL.D., F.RS. "A very readable account of the phenomena of volcanoes and earth- quakes. " — Nature, XX. PUBLIC HEALTH. By Dr. J. F. J. Sykes. With numerous Illustrations. *'Not by any means a mere compilation or a dry record of details and statistics, but it takes up essential points in evolution, environment, prophy- laxis, and sanitation bearing upon the preservation of public health." — Lancet. XXL MODERN METEOROLOGY. An Account of the Growth and Present Condition of some Branches OF Meteorological Science. By Frank Waldo, Ph.D., Member of the German and Austrian Meteorological Societies, etc.; late Junior Professor, Signal Service, U.S.A. With 112 Illustrations. "The present volume is the best on the subject for general use that we have seen." — Daily Telegraph (London). XXIL THE GERM-PLASM : A THEORY OF HEREDITY. By August WeiSxMANN, Professor in the University of Freiburg-in-Breisgau. With 24 Illustrations. I2.50. "There has been no woik published since Darwin's own books which has so thoroughly handled the matter treated by him, or has done so much to place in order and clearness the immense complexity of the factors of heredity, or, lastly, has brought to light so many new facts and considerations bearing on the subject.'* — British Medical Journal, New York ; Charlbs Scribnbr's Sons. XXIII. INDUSTRIES OF ANIMALS. By E. F. Houssay. With numerous Illustrations. " His accuracy is undoubted, yet his facts out-marvel all romance. These facts are here made use of as materials wherewith to form the mighty fabric of evolution." — Mattchester Guardian, XXIV. MAN AND WOMAN. By Havelock Ellis. Illus- trated. Second Edition. " Mr. Havelock Ellis belongs, in some measure, to the continental school of anthropologists ; but while equally methodical in the collection of facts, he is far more cautious in the invention of theories, and he has the further distinction of being not only able to think, but able to write. His book is a sane and impartial consideration, from a psychological and anthropological point of view, of a subject which is certainly of primary interest." — AthefUEum. XXV. THE EVOLUTION OF MODERN CAPITALISM. By John A. Hobson, M.A. ** Every page affords evidence of wide and minute study, a weighing of facts as conscientious as it is acute, a keen sense of the importance of certain points as to which economists of all schools have hitherto been confused and careless, and an impartiality generally so great as to give no indication of his [Mr. Hobson's] personal sympathies." — Pall Mall Gazelle, XXVI. APPARITIONS AND THOUGHT - TRANSFER- ENCE. By Frank Podmore, M.A. **A very sober and interesting little book. . . . That tjiought-transfer- ence is a real thing, though not perhaps a very common thing, he certainly shows. " — Spectator, XXVII. AN INTRODUCTION TO COMPARATIVE PSYCHOLOGY. By Professor C. Lloyd Morgan. With Diagrams. ** A strong and complete exposition of Psychology, as it takes shape in a mind previously informed with biological science. . . . Well written, ex- tremely entertaining, and intrinsically valuable." — Saturday /Review, XXVIII. THE ORIGINS OF INVENTION : A Study of Industry among Primitive Peoples. By Otis T. Mason, Curator of the Department of Ethnology in the United States National Museum. **A valuable history of the development of the inventive faculty." — Nature. XXIX. THE GROWTH OF THE BRAIN: A Study of THE Nervous System in relation to Education. By Henry Herbert Donaldson, Professor of Neurology in the University of Chicago. ** We can say with confidence that Professor Donaldson has executed his work with much care, judgment, and discrimination.'' — The Lancet, New York : Charles Scribner's Sons. XXX. EVOLUTION IN ART; As Illustrated by the Life-Histories of Designs. By Professor Alfred C. Haddon. With 130 Illustrations. **It is impossible to speak too highly of this most unassuming and invaluable book," —yottmai of AnthropologictU Institute, XXXL THE PSYCHOLOGY OF THE EMOTIONS. By Th. Ribot, Professor at the College of France, Editor of the Revue Philosophique, "Professor Ribot's treatment is careful, modern, and adequate." — Ac